…..and I think everyone else should too, ‘cos it’s a work of genius!
I’m not talking about 3rd wave academic feminism, which is really all kinds of awesome and a godsend. I’m talking about blogosphere “hey, my boyfriend came on my face and I’m empowered!” feminism. It just seems to boil down to a bunch of women in their twenties and thirties who’ve settled down with a man (or have before or will), who like penis, and who really really want to talk about how Radical feminists are outdated harpies and they’ve seen the light! Evidently, the light is phallus-shaped and full of delicious bullshit, but I’m sure that you got that point by now.
So, to return to the title of this post:
Dear Anti-Radical Feminists,
You like penis. I get it. I got it on your last post about blow jobs in between how Dworkin is a total knob and you really heart Angelina Jolie and/or porn. I’m really quite happy that this endlessly self-reflecting homophobic world has provided you with endless avenues to explore your glorious and endangered heterosexuality. Please write another post on the clitoris and how to grind properly against a male pubic bone in the customary penis-in-vagina intercourse. I seem to have misplaced the two billion issues of Cosmo that do the same thing.
More from XXBlaze here
Too Much To Say For Myself 
Ok:
I have to twist myself in knots to find a feminist active in the blogosphere who is happily feminist and queer, and who hasn’t shacked up with a man and is presently enjoying straight priviledge.
I live closeted to all but my close friends and my father. So pretending to be straight means I’m very often suppressing the majority of my identity—namely, the majority that finds women really fascinating.
Am I the only one who’s confused? Erm, isn’t someone who’s ‘closeted’ enjoying straight privilege?
And can I make a truly shocking suggestion?
(ooh go on Polly).
Maybe, just maybe, the reason straight ‘sex positive’ feminists get so defensive about liking penis, and feel they need to stress it so much, is because everyone’s always telling them they must be *lesbians* or at the very least *queer* to be true radical feminists?
TBH Cath, I think it’s just the same in the closet, ooh I once had sex with a woman and that makes me really out there and daring (but not daring enough to experience any actual RL consquences of not being 100% heterosexual obviously) and not like you boring old straight women, cos I’m ‘queer’, I’m ‘cool’, bunch of old baloney I’ve been whinging about for a bit.
But that’s just me, obviously. I’m bitter, and in a foul mood.
Also
The entire reason I tire of this endless fuckbag wankery over how blow jobs are so empowering is because it’s disgustingly homophobic and the biggest exercise of heterosexual priviledge in an ideology that thinks itself so much better than that.
The reason I object to the idea that blowjobs are empowering is, purely and simply that it’s bullshit. It’s not homophobic though. It’s not homophobic to not be sexually attracted to people of the same sex, any more than it’s ‘heterophobic’ to not be attracted to people of the opposite sex.
Sorry, should read….
The entire reason I tire of this endless fuckbag wankery over how blow jobs are so empowering is because it’s disgustingly homophobic and the biggest exercise of heterosexual priviledge in an ideology that thinks itself so much better than that.
The reason I object to the idea that blowjobs are empowering is, purely and simply that it’s bullshit. It’s not homophobic though. It’s not homophobic to not be sexually attracted to people of the same sex, any more than it’s ‘heterophobic’ to not be attracted to people of the opposite sex.
Hah! That’s the bit I did a double take on too Polly.
And an interesting analysis, thanks. Now you’ve got me thinking.
I still love the way she writes though.
Yup bits of it are fine, but it just made me go, hang on a minute……
Ooops, my comment was in response to your first one Polly.
But isn’t she saying, rather than that blow jobs per se are homophobic, that feminists constantly going on about blow jobs being empowering is homophobic, because that kind of narrative completely ignores lesbians: it implies that in order to be empowered women ought to be experiencing the joys of giving a guy head, and not all women are either willing or able to do that……
I dunno, if you are saying ONLY blow jobs are empowering, then yes that is homophobic. But TBH I don’t think I’ve ever seen anyone argue that. You could certainly say it’s heterocentric…..Or heteronormative, but if you’re straight, I don’t see anything wrong with writing about straight sex per se.
There was a piece on the F word about it recently, and like I said my main objection to the premise was that it was just daft.
http://www.thefword.org.uk/blog/2009/01/is_it_good_to_g
Someone once accused me of being biphobic because I didn’t write about bisexuals. And as I said back, I don’t write about zebras, is that zebra phobic?
To say ‘all woman are empowered by giving blow jobs’ IS homophobic. Because it assumes all women are heterosexual. To say “I find giving blow jobs” empowering is just a statement of personal preference.
Agree with you, Cath – a great piece of writing, and an author with a marvellous turn of phrase.
Am I the only one who doesn’t define herself through sex, or sexual performance, though? As a feminist, I define my feminism through my work, interests, attitude, politics, friends, etc. I’ve never once given anyone a blowjob and thought – fuck, I’m a feminist. I’ve just given a blowjob and thought – cool, he seemed to like that.
Probably I’m just getting old.
I have the same problem, hangbitch.
I am quite old, so that might be it.
That, or I’m heterophobic maybe.
But in case the author is looking hard, I am neither shacked up with a man, or enjoying straight privilege.
However it turns out I’m not feminist either.
No, you’re not the only one hangbitch. But then I’m getting old too, so what would I know.
And Polly. Meh, you can deny it all you want, but we know the truth. You’re a feminist. And not the fun kind 🙂
“Someone once accused me of being biphobic because I didn’t write about bisexuals. And as I said back, I don’t write about zebras, is that zebra phobic? ”
I don’t eat tuna, so I kick any stranded dolphins I come across., I’d hate folks to think I liked them.
See, I’ve never seen this. Same as I’ve never seen any radical feminist actually be “anti-sex” or “sex-negative”. I don’t mean that absolutely nobody ever wrote or said anything like that ever, but that I’ve read an awful lot of these hetero-defensive posts and comments, and none of them have been responses to someone actually saying “you aren’t a proper feminist if you do x”. Instead they are always projecting that sense of judgement onto the words of whoever they are responding to.
Some feminist writes something vaguely critical about some heterosexual/heteronormative practice, and some other feminists who do these things in their own personal life feel personally attacked. Same old, same old; a very understandable emotional reaction, but ultimately a political dead-end.
I think it’s that on some level they are beating themselves up for not being “proper” feminists. It’s like the very similar debates about beauty practices and feminity – women apologise for wearing lipstick, dresses, high-heels etc. But, again, I can’t recall ever someone writing critically about femininity saying that if you do something conventionally feminine then you’re not a proper feminist. The defiant or apologetic reaction is not provoked or demanded, it’s internal, a self-judgement. As must have been said over and over, some feminist writing something somewhere isn’t causing you to do or not do anything – most recently and rather brilliantly here, for one.
There’s an inherent and inescapable feminist compromise in being shacked up with a man or otherwise putting your time, energy, attention and sexuality into relating to a man, because simply by doing that you are repeating the expected role of women under patriarchy, regardless of your own intentions or his niceness. Also, bags ‘n’ bags of straight privilege.
I write as a straight feminist woman shacked up with a man. I don’t feel any need to feel guilty about it, but nor do I feel any need to go on and on that shagging a man can be really ultra-feminist, no really it can. I can read lesbian feminists and separatist feminists with perfect equanimity and not feel remotely bothered that they’ve somehow forgotten to validate heterosexually-partnered women’s experiences and personal preferences. My choice to give oral sex or not is my own decision, I do not need Andrea Dworkin to have written “ok, go ahead and do it and don’t feel conflicted about it, I’m aok with you giving head, I, Andrea Dworkin Super Feminist, endorse your heterosexual choices”. If I were to try bdsm, for example, any conflicted feelings or doubts about it would be my own feminist doubts, not the result of having read some feminist blogger being negative about it.
YES-THIS:
“Maybe, just maybe, the reason straight ’sex positive’ feminists get so defensive about liking penis, and feel they need to stress it so much, is because everyone’s always telling them they must be *lesbians* or at the very least *queer* to be true radical feminists?”
I am not a “sex positive” feminist (and am generally reallllly irritated by the whole “sex pos” thing- as if all other feminists are anti-sex? Um, no) but I can very much relate to this statement. I don’t feel any need to go around talking about my sex life, in general, but it gets old fast listening to this crap.
I have heard this a LOT- that I am not a real radical feminist because I live with a guy and (gasp!) sometimes even have teh sex with him. I’m “in denial” or I “just don’t get it” or I “will someday see the error of my ways” and on and on and on. It gets old. According to these people, if I was a good little radical feminist I would dump the boyfriend and “choose” to be with a woman. And if I don’t, I’m just lying to myself and dontcha know all men are rapists and would rape you if they had the chance.
Bleh.
Oh MariaS. There are many, many, many advocates of *political* lesbianism about. I could provide you with links if you want. But Buggle proves I am not lying I think.
And I write as a lesbian who was recently castigated at length for *reducing lesbianism to genital sexuality* no less.
Like here for example
http://www.feminist-reprise.org/wpblog/2009/05/thoughts-pure-and-impure/
Personally I’d rather spend my time with my straight female friends than someone who is pretending to be a *lesbian* because they think it’s cool any day of the week.
And needless to add, but I’m going to add it anyway, but I’m heartily pissed off with *political* lesbians who aren’t actually sexually attracted to women and so far in their imaginary closet they could be in Narnia, telling me that being a lesbian is all about being ‘womyn focussed womyn” .
I don’t identify with the ‘sex positive’ camp – and yeah, as if everyone else is sex negative.
But yes, *certain* radical feminists (not those here) do almost sound prudish, like the religious right, with their ‘thou shalt nots’.
And yes – political lesbianism is… bizarre.
Being sexually and romantically attracted to the oppressor class – it is hard. It really is. There are so few men who have *any* idea about feminism. I would rather be single forever and OMG DIE. AND BE EATEN BY MY CATS than settle for a crappy relationship with a slob who expects me to wash his clothes, cook his meals, and clean the home and gives nothing in return.
But – ‘I don’t think I’ll bother with men, I’ll be a lesbian instead’ is not the answer.
I mean, I so *would* be a lesbian if I…was a lesbian.
“Maybe, just maybe, the reason straight ’sex positive’ feminists get so defensive about liking penis, and feel they need to stress it so much, is because everyone’s always telling them they must be *lesbians* or at the very least *queer* to be true radical feminists?”
Yes. This.
“I would rather be single forever and OMG DIE. AND BE EATEN BY MY CATS than settle for a crappy relationship with a slob who expects me to wash his clothes, cook his meals, and clean the home and gives nothing in return.”
You don’t know what you are missing.
There is something terribly noble and radical about dutifully pottering about the kitchen, as hubby fights the good fight.
On the other hand there is definitely a constituency within feminism, which at times, has been a little critical of the barefoot and pregnant wing of hubby-posi-feminism (HPF)
Gregory
Oh and http://xxblaze.wordpress.com/2009/04/12/unchanging-orientation-a-point-that-should-not-be-ceded/
this from Jenn:
‘Transpersons and intersexed persons do not have a definitive place of the gender binary to call their own. Thus, they cannot call themselves either straight or gay.’
is ridiculous.
FAIL. If one more person lumps together intersex and trans people…
Most intersex people do NOT experience a problem with their gender. And most are straight or gay.
Plus, sexual orientation is NOT chosen.
Where to begin? Here perhaps?
An example would be a gay bar whose patrons are not friendly to the expression of heterosexual relationships therein. How do they create a place for the bisexual woman with a male partner? Is this possible?
This woman has NEVER been to Vanilla!
But WTF should gay bars create spaces for bi women with male partners? They can go everywhere else in the flipping country. So they can go and try to pull lesbians for threesomes?
PLUS it’s now illegal to have gay bars anyway.
In the course of the gay rights movement, it seems that sexual orientation has been constructed as something unchanging. Gay people are assumed to have been born gay, and their sexual choices are thus “natural” and above political analysis.
Doh! Ever read any Judith Butler?
Also it is not gay rights who come up with crap about brains being hardwired, it’s evo psychs. And bad science.
“In the course of the gay rights movement, it seems that sexual orientation has been constructed as something unchanging. Gay people are assumed to have been born gay, and their sexual choices are thus “natural” and above political analysis.”
In Holland any gay with a sick note was out the door.
Homosexuality: it isn’t natural | spiked
24 Jun 2008 … Ignore those researchers who claim to have discovered a ‘gay gene’, says Peter Tatchell: gay desire is not genetically determined. …
A GLF perspective perhaps and the Dutch version..
‘Zelden rust-Noordanus stated “homo sexuality does not exist”, meaning there was no separate homo- or heterosexual identity’
http://www2.fmg.uva.nl/gl/radsex.html
That was both serious and completely accepted.
By homosexuals (without a sense of nullifying irony).
Gregory