To me, sex-negative ideas have always seemed regressive. How can one person say that our natural desires (which if done consensually) are a form of victimizing or directly relate in anyway to the patriarchal mindset? Sex-negativism may stem from various roots (rape victimization, perhaps certain Abrahamic religious practices... etc) but none of which seem progressive or relevant to human nature.
With the sex-negative topic out of the way, I want to go back to my understanding of feminism. One of the major issues regarding feminism is the idea of male privilege. Me, being someone who works for two female managers, I quickly laughed at that idea. "How can I (a white, middle class male) have some sort of set privilege within society if two illegitimate authority figures above me are both female?" The way I see it, society has made major strides in favor of female rights. That isn't to say that the human race hasn't been in a constant struggle since the beginning of our existence. I've read about the witchcraft hunts and the old indoctrinated belief that women are merely property. To this day, I would agree that there are still stigmas against women even in our own society.
Some of the lessons feminism has taught me were mostly the preconceived cultural notions many men hold. You know... the usual "women belong in the kitchen," "women should stay home and raise the kids," and those sort of gender roles that are unfairly given to women. It appears to me, however, that major financial institutions which dominate our society aren't as sexist as the people who privately hold on to these customs out of cultural indoctrination. For instance, women can usually apply to almost any capitalist institution a male can. Matter of fact, certain sex-target institutions (like strip clubs) discriminate in FAVOR of female employees.
Speaking of sex-target institutions, this was to me the absolute puzzling idea of all so far. There's a certain debate over whether females are naturally inclined (by development through evolution) to withhold sex or if they're culturally pressured into being less sexually liberated than males. There seems to be a big issue with how males perceive promiscuous behavior by females. Matter of fact, females will also throw around terms like "slut" and "whore." It's like there is an ingrained idea that women should keep celibate until they're married or at least have a boyfriend and casual sex is frowned upon.
So the question here is, "Is it morally wrong (with "emotional suffering" as the basis) for a woman to 'give herself' sexually to a male without being in a relationship with him?" Well, consider that society has set up a ridiculous standard for female sexuality. That standard is a male expectation that their future girlfriend/ and or wife will be pure and their only sexual experiences will have happened with them. At first glance, this would appear to be a sexist cultural notion that only hurts women. However, wouldn't this entire social arrangement also be unfortunate for males too? Males, on the other hand, can be the go-getter. So they're out hunting for "that pussy" in a world of women who've been taught to "save themselves" for the right one. Wouldn't this entire set-up be both frustrating to men and women? It's like there was a wall put up.
Notice for example, the meme "forever alone." It usually always depicts a sexually deprived male. I had read (a few months ago or so) an online post where people were discussing how this image is an example of guys putting female sexuality on a pedestal. This is where sex with a female is hardly attainable, while a guy will stick his dick in any person who just so happens to have a vagina out of complete desperation. Ever been in a chat room before? It's comprised mostly of guys who will jerk off for anyone who'll watch their cam and a bunch of girls who refuse to watch because "they're not like that" or they claim to "not enjoy seeing a guy jack off."
Ultimately, I think the real solution is to embrace casual sex. The conclusion I've drawn here is that casual sex is desired by both males and females alike, but due to sex-negative cultural traditions, women withhold it out of "self respect." But can we really base a woman's worth by the number of guys she's slept with? Well, if the social arrangement glorifies what a woman does with her body, then yes... people will subconsciously measure a girl's worth by how sexually active she is. This, to me, is the real problem and it affects not only the females, but males also.
Truth be told, I do consider myself a feminist but not for reasons many people would probably automatically assume. Women, in my opinion, shouldn't have the default role of cleaning the house, raising the kids or taking the last name of their husband (and marriage is a whole other topic). Women shouldn't have their worth measured by their sexuality in any way. However, I'm not going to attack the patriarchy right away for the issue of judging women by their sexuality. Women themselves have to change their ways. Stop using the term "whore" as an insult to one another (men should do the same). Stop embracing the idea that your sexuality is to be glorified and given to you as the basis of your own worth. I see these real issues as part of a whole and it needs to be dealt with at once by everyone.
One last concern I had was the idea of political correctness. Yes, it'd be nice if people were more respectful in conversation, but our language isn't really the large issue. Language merely reflects attitude and stomping out sexist language would only be achieved through stomping out these preconceived notions. It saddens me when authoritarian leftists talk about smashing the patriarchy by eliminating the sexist language. Oppression is no way to deal with sexism. Only a cultural revolution for the people and by the people can really change anything.
No comments:
Post a Comment