Home
Archive
Newsletters
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise

Sex and Relationships

The Battle for Female Sexuality

By Jenny Block, Huffington Post. Posted April 4, 2008.


Young women are still told that their worth hinges on guarding what's between their legs. It's time for all women to own their sexuality.
Advertisement
Upcoming AlterNet stories on Digg

Last night I heard the fearless Jessica Valenti, the author of Full Frontal Feminism and the founder of feministing.com, speak at Southern Methodist University in Dallas, Texas. I was both elated and devastated. The thing is, Valenti is eight years my junior and is still battling the same sexism that I did. It's funny, I remember when I was in college and going to feminist rallies or lobbying for pro-choice, my mother would say how she was proud of me for fighting for a better world and sad for me that her own protesting had not brought forth the kind of world she had hoped for for me.

Don't get me wrong. I'm thrilled that Valenti is out there fighting the good fight. I'm just baffled at how as much as things have changed so many things have stayed painfully the same. We're still fighting for the right to control our own bodies. We're still fighting for equal pay. We're still struggling for the most basic sense of equality in terms of worth and ability. But what really struck a chord with me last night was when Valenti spoke about the battle over women's rights over their own sexuality and how we're still frighteningly far away from owning those.

There are the purity balls attempting to convince young women that their value lies between their legs and that that commodity belongs to daddy until a suitable man comes along to whom its ownership can be transferred. There is abstinence-only education that fills young women's heads with lies leaving them more likely than those given true sex education to end up having oral and anal sex and contracting STDs. And, of course, they also reiterate to girls that their value is their virginity. Lose that and you have nothing left to offer. Then there are the lovely advertising campaigns that tell woman all the things they must do and buy to be sexually attractive else they find themselves -- horror of all horrors! -- without a man.

I can't help but marvel at how much this battle over female sexuality and the refusal to allow women to own it themselves so directly affects the way people look at me. As a bi-sexual, polyamorous, married woman, I epitomize a woman who demands control over her own sexuality. That terrifies people. And rightly so. Once we girls refuse to think of ourselves as nothing more than receptacles for the male sex organ, then we are free to spend less time tossing our hair and more time tossing out the trash who are serving in office, making the laws, presiding over the bench, and generally perpetuating the myth of woman as helpless toy.

What some people fail to understand though is that women having control over their own sexuality (let alone their bodies and their minds and their lives) benefits everyone because those women have the opportunity to be whole women. And no self-respecting man should want anything less. No more guessing what she's thinking or what she wants. No more living with someone who has become so programmed to ignore her own desires that she doesn't even remember what they were. No more wishing you had an equal but pretending you wanted Barbie.

I used to be upset by the people who called me a whore and said they pitied my husband. "Who are you to think you deserve to be happy?" their comments seemed to say. "How dare you want to be fulfilled sexually? You're just a woman," I heard them whispering between the lines. But now I simply pity them. Sexuality has gotten a bad rap. It's great in the movies and in the glossy magazines, but when it comes to real life, it's supposed to be ignored for "higher" pursuits. Well, hell with that. My sexuality is part of me and it is no more nor less of a part than anything else.

Men who want to rule the playground are right to be frightened of women like me. They are right to be concerned that the balance of power might shift to the center and away from their boy's club. As long as woman can be made to feel badly about their sexuality, so too can they be distracted from the larger issues. But I have hope that those days are numbered.

Valenti and the many other young women like her are fighting for that change. And so am I. For as far as I'm concerned, redefining marriage and validating relationships outside of heterosexual, monogamous marriages is one of the many ways we can work toward returning a woman's sexuality to its rightful owner. And, trust me, she wants it back.

Digg!    Share on facebook   submit to reddit    Bookmark on Delicious   Stumble This  

See more stories tagged with: feminism, women, abstinence, sexuality, open marriage, sex-ed

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from Sex and Relationships! Sign up now »


Advertisement
Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
Frustrated, eh?
Posted by: 23skidoo on Apr 4, 2008 2:14 PM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"We're still fighting for the right to control our own bodies. We're still fighting for equal pay. We're still struggling for the most basic sense of equality in terms of worth and ability. But what really struck a chord with me last night was when Valenti spoke about the battle over women's rights over their own sexuality and how we're still frighteningly far away from owning those."

Well, if you choose to keep fighting battles you have already won, you will probably remain frustrated. Maybe you should exercise your 'rights' and get along with your life. The rest of us would be happy to have you join in!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Shut up, holocaust-denier Posted by: janvdb
» RE: Shut up, holocaust-denier Posted by: 23skidoo
» please buy a one-way ticket Posted by: goatini
» oh, i see... Posted by: goatini
» RE: oh, i see... Posted by: leta
» all feminists want Posted by: goatini
» RE: oh, i see... Posted by: 23skidoo
» RE: oh, i see... Posted by: meeneecat
Matriarchy is desperately needed
Posted by: TheJamea on Apr 4, 2008 11:20 PM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
...for about the next coupla centuries, to bring us to a place where we might be able to see the center.
Please read "The Gate to Women's Country" by Sheri S. Tepper. I try to get my chauvinist acquaintances to read it.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» if the patriarchy Posted by: goatini
» RE: if the patriarchy Posted by: 23skidoo
» "fictional 'patriarchy'"? Posted by: goatini
» RE: "fictional 'patriarchy'"? Posted by: 23skidoo
I find the term "open marriage" and "polyamory" to be funny.
Posted by: rickiey on Apr 5, 2008 5:56 AM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Lets face it, the terms simply mean "both spouses can screw around"

You aren't fighting for women's rights, you are screwing around.

Your father didn't transfer your sexual rights to your husband, you did. And in return, he gave you his.

If you wanted to screw around, you shouldn't have gotten married. Because a big part of being married is "not screwing around".

Of course, the women in the "open marriages" always feel like they are winning the deal. Because men are scum, thats why. Most decent women have too much class to sleep with a married man, open marriage or not.

Most scummy men, will still sleep with a married women, given the opportunity.

Sorry, I don't think sleeping with multiple scummy men, makes you any sort of feminist hero.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Good response! Posted by: Beepath
» RE: Good response! Posted by: 23skidoo
» i find the code words Posted by: goatini
Projects...
Posted by: talkville on Apr 6, 2008 2:59 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Nietzsche once emphasized a concept of distinction: The Single One. Each one of us, from birth, are a Single One. Each of us is a whole autonomous (NOT "independent"!) human being which implies also becoming. Each of us develops and becomes self-conscious and struggles within ourselves in so, so many ways. Each one of us develops and becomes aware of sexual and social feelings to one extent or another and never completely. We find there are others like us who can talk, speak, play, but also different like boys or girls, males and females. We each constantly struggle to bring a sense of fullness and contentment and happiness in ourselves. These are Alone Struggles.

Then we also must encounter and interact with Others, always; we are Social. That is a related and social struggle joined with that internal one. When we're born, those who come before us attend to needs and wants even occasionally those affective ones!

But do those who come before us emphasize respect, dignity, equity, justice, value, towards self and towards others? Or do they teach to WANT them, always Out There Somewhere.

Then there's Owning; Possession, which is related intimately with Property. And there is Self Possession and Possession of Other things (historically also humans one of another -- even today!). And the acquisition of Property is THE non-plus-ultra of capitalist activity ("Business" it is called). Some theories of civilization posit the possession of at least a portion of human beings (like labor-power for example); others include also sexual-power, for example). These can be alienated, transferred, distributed and owned, bonded, rented or hired 'contractually' one might say. Way deeper and more consequential assumptions lie deep below the surface of all those dry and tedious treatises of Economics such as taught at U of Chicago, Harvard, and a multitude of other places! And in these areas a singularly large amount of intellectual work needs to be done by you feminists with respect to your organized endeavors.

It is dialectical and dynamic. Struggles within, struggles together, coalitions. The Single One, Single Ones Together and, like all other struggles for liberation, dignity, equity, and justice, addressing the Central Mastodon, that Invisible and always walked-around concept that rules each single one of our lives, male or female at all times in this country: Possession and it's cousin Property and these in relation to their Partner in Crime: Law.

As with Labor-Power, our current social and institutional system will Force, Coerce and Demand alienation to a "Market" in exchange for survival itself. It's the Invisible Hand of Smith relentlessly at work. Our wholeness is being parcelled and fragmented (sex, labor, pleasure, intelligence, beauty, etc. etc.) into commodified values forced into the service of "free trade".

Avanti! feminist friends.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Hurray for the women fighting this battle
Posted by: janvdb on Apr 8, 2008 6:42 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The old "double-standard" is just another way to keep women down. To leave us open to an assault based on behavior which is allowed to men, should we step on someone's toes.

If you want people to restrict their sexual activity, well, OK but you HAVE to put those restrictions on men and women EQUALLY -- or you're a misogynist and a bigot.

Your "morality" is not about "morality," it's just more woman-bashing.

Just more male powermongering.

So, don't go "moralizing" around me.

Jan VanDenBerg

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

RE: Terrified?
Posted by: Ames on Apr 11, 2008 12:04 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
the hypocrisy of your comment is also astounding. you are clearly judging the author's sexual preferences and attitude based on your own attitudes and how you beleive other people should feel about sex, ie "something that is precious, something you share only with a life partner".

really, what's important here is that is your prerogative, that's how you feel about it, and that's great. the author feels differently about sex, that's not shallow, it's just different to you. each person is entitled to pursue a fulfilling sex life (so long as everyone is adult, informed and consenting - i think they're qualifications pretty much everyone can agree on) and if one person's choices don't float your boat, it doesn't matter because you get to fulfill your own life in the way of your own choosing.

and those last words i wrote are the most important and circle back into the main theme of the article. it's about choice. about owning ourselves, being autonomous and choosing for ourselves (fully informed of the options and eyes wide open) what path will most fulfill us.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement