View Single Post
Old 01-09-2010, 07:31 AM
redpepper's Avatar
redpepper redpepper is offline
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Canada
Posts: 7,723

So to get back to sex...

I don't know which way I would fall if I were to identify. So I choose not to at this point. I understand sex positive to mean that expressing ones sexuality is good for everyone and healthy. I understand sex negative to mean that not all porn stars are lovin' the life, that people are exploited because of the pervasive view that our modern sex culture is geared towards male fantasy.

I think that there has been a lot of sex positive stuff out there that has contributed greatly to sex being acceptable to talk about, teach and to practice more freely. Authors such as Carol Queen come to mind.

Sex positive feminists come to mind also such as Susie Bright. She rocks! There is also the fact that sex positive beliefs have made natural child birth and breastfeeding to transgenderism more tolerable in the mainstream and continue to be more so. There is a debate about what sex positive really is amongst feminists that both authors and others examine.

There is some stuff that worries me also such as the development of "raunch culture" or "slut culture." This is where I tend to identify with sex negative. Some sex negative definitions seem very Victorian and old school in terms of sexual expression but some of the beliefs really jive with me. Sex can empower women for sure, but also disempower them. In "raunch culture," women are more objectified and oppressed because the sexuality of women is geared more toward male fantasy than around what female sexual energy and power is... in this way women are not more liberated, rather they are more free to shake their booty for men to see and take advantage of. That to me isn't liberation and we preach this attitude to young girls in advertising, magazines EVERYWHERE in the media and sometimes in their own home and friend environments. Hugh Hefner would not agree with me or sex negative feminists on this one!

It was the definition or "raunch culture" and sex negative attitudes in this way that made me decide not to swing anymore. It went against my kind of feminism. I felt used and ashamed of myself for allowing myself to believe that I had been empowered. I realize that I was in a situation whereby I was not empowered as a woman and that is not every swinging situation... just to clarify, but it had been my experience. It has also been my reading of "raunch culture" that has made me feel a need to be more dominant in my BDSM life. I think I have a need to bring back to myself what I have lost... also to choose a more polyfi relationship with my men and to accept the bounds of that in terms of allowing good men to remind me to remember that my body is sacred and a gift. Not that they own it, but that I should choose carefully who I show it to and share it with. It is precious and should not be shared with everyone, but of whom I choose and for ME as much as them...

I try to remember all this when deciding which events to go to, what situations to be in, who I spend my intimate time with and how I behave in sexually charged social situations and with my loves. I have a very high standard of relationship now, not because I am sex negative or sex positive identified, but because a culmination of the two means they cancel each other out somehow for me. The definitions of them mix together for me. I have taken what I need from each understanding of both.
Anyone want to be friends on Facebook?
Send me your name via PM
My blog
Reply With Quote