unsexy responsibility
Rape culture has benefited enormously by appropriating concepts like body positivity and kink positivity and sex positivity and using them as way to shut down criticism. Every time I write something like this, I have to fight the urge to describe what a sex-loving, kinky girl I am, because I know that critiquing this shit will lead to attacks on my own sexuality. We are terrified of being mistaken for prudes, because to be a prude is to be judged as naive, backwards and broken, and is also viewed an invitation for sexual aggression. What is the major reason give for demonizing the entirety of second-wave feminism, after all? Those uptight old bitches hated sex! There’s a lot of critique of the second wave on Tumblr that includes throwaway references to transphobia in the movement, but this is seldom followed up with any nuanced critiques or understanding of transphobia today. Contrast that with the eagerness of many self-described feminists to assure us that they’re not ugly, hairy, lesbian misandrists who hate porn and sexy pictures. The first rule of internet feminism is to make sure no one besides certain right wing caricatures hates you.
The whole post is good but I find this part particularly true.
I want someone to seriously expand on the idea that being a prude is an invitation for sexual aggression because I have found that to be painfully true my whole life, but something that feminists don’t tend to want to address. We have tomes and tomes on “slut-shaming” but the equally powerful other end of the spectrum is almost never discussed. It is the sentiment behind the pornification of nuns and Catholic school girls in the media. “If they won’t give it up, I will take it from them!” It is expanded into a general method for silencing women in the context of dismissing women’s anger as a sign of “needing to get laid.” There’s a point in the Venn diagram of misogyny, too, where we confuse lesbianism and “prudery” and the signifiers are similar (easy to maintain haircut, no-nonsense shoes, won’t fuck bros…) and it blurs with homophobia. And a large reason why feminists won’t address this aspect of misogyny, which hurts women just as much as “slut-shaming,” is because THEY LOVE IT! Young feminists in particular ADORE a good prude-shaming session. They aspire to the better parts of the “slut” archetype (wild and free and multiply orgasmic!), but “prude” is something to be avoided at all costs. And prude-shaming is leftist bros’ favorite tool for disarming women on the right (Sarah Palin, Condi, etc) too, so it has to stay available for those purposes as well—for feminists to demarcate which women are worth defending and which are not REALLY women, but prudes.
Someone really needs to write a ton more on this, because I really want to read it. (And don’t say I should be the one to expand upon this because if I did nothing would come out but lots of filthy cursing and then I would start crying and have to go hide under the covers with a stuffed owl. Too much relevant life experience on this one.)
Yeah like there’s a slogan flying around that goes “Feminists have better sex” and its like really? So if I find sex complicated, frightening, uncomfortable or not particularly high on my agenda I must be a bad feminist?
And i think the fact that so many young women are willing to label themselves as asexual and uncriticaly buy into all the stuff tied in in that is because its legitimated in a way being a “prude” isn’t, like it seems its ok to be “asexual” that’s a valid political social position, but being a prude? That’s just because you’re boring or uptight. And for myself (and I am what would be considered a prude) it really bothers me that somehow I’m at fault for reacting to the way patriarchy damages women and damages their sexuality in a way that works for me politically, emotionally, and religiously.
Yeah that is what I think drives the asexuality movement too. If you put a label on it that resembles other sexual orientations and “kinks,” then it falls under the dictum “your kink is not my kink but it’s ok” or whatever ktd (kids these days—I need a shorthand I say it so much lol) are saying. But if you just say nah, no thanks and get labeled a prude, you are assumed to be right-wing, oppressive, boring, and a whole bunch of other probably not-applicable stuff. Similarly, just not wanting to drink or do drugs might have labeled you a square in certain circles, so “sXe” was born so you could still be “cool,” but maintain the ability to opt out of things that made you uncomfortable.
Yes to all of this. I always get the distinct impression that my decision to not be sexually active is interpreted as a judgment of those who choose to be sexually active. Oh wait. It’s not an impression. I have literally had a person become outraged at me for sharing my own reasons for (at least temporary) celibacy. This person launched into an aggressive argument for sexual freedom and how wrong I was about sex and how wrong my Church is about sex. But I at no point in that particular conversation said that I thought my moral code should be imposed on anyone else. Did I share an opinion about what I think is ideal for people leading to my conclusion about what I choose for myself? Yes. Was I careful to state that I in no way judge anyone who has come to a different conclusion? Of course. Was my personal private choice about my sex life both denounced as wrong and interpreted as a judgment on everyone else? Yes.
And I’ve gotten the same reaction in various degrees from many people. I’m so freaking sick and tired of it.
