The RedEye is like a worn ad lib, insert unnecessary sexy photo here
The article was about the now infamous Northwestern professor whose human sexuality class has been canceled after the “fuck saw scandal.” Apparently the RedEye will use any excuse to put some quasi porn on their cover and barely scrape the surface of an issue.
Filed under Low Brow, Newspapers, Sex, WTF RedEye?
The Root published a fantastic article recently about a young man’s struggle to understand the term feminist and why he should claim the title for himself.
“Like most guys, I had bought into the stereotype that all feminists were white, lesbian, unattractive male bashers who hated all men. But after reading the work of these black feminists, I realized that this was far from the truth. After digging into their work, I came to really respect the intelligence, courage and honesty of these women.
Feminists did not hate men. In fact, they loved men. But just as my father had silenced my mother during their arguments to avoid hearing her gripes, men silenced feminists by belittling them in order to dodge hearing the truth about who we are.
I learned that feminists offered an important critique about a male-dominated society that routinely, and globally, treated women like second-class citizens. They spoke the truth, and even though I was a man, their truth spoke to me. Through feminism, I developed a language that helped me better articulate things that I had experienced growing up as a male.
Feminist writings about patriarchy, racism, capitalism and structural sexism resonated with me because I had witnessed firsthand the kind of male dominance they challenged. I saw it as a child in my home and perpetuated it as an adult. Their analysis of male culture and male behavior helped me put my father’s patriarchy into a much larger social context, and also helped me understand myself better.
I decided that I loved feminists and embraced feminism. Not only does feminism give woman a voice, but it also clears the way for men to free themselves from the stranglehold of traditional masculinity. When we hurt the women in our lives, we hurt ourselves, and we hurt our community, too.”
Read the full article here.
Filed under Feminist Rant, Low Brow, Magazine, Sex
Ross Douthat’s had a lovely little tidbit in the New York Times last week about the cost of promiscuity…on women. As Dothart says less sexual partners “increases the odds that [women’s] adult sexual lives will be a source of joy rather than sorrow.” His argument is notably reserved for women.
The facts come from a study showing women with increased sexual partners are decreasingly unhappy. However this fact doesn’t say if the connection is causation or correlation aka do women sleep with more people because they are unhappy or does sleeping with more people make one unhappy. Or ignoring both of these suggestions is there something about behind the sex such as finding a stable partner that increases happiness.
According to a professor intereviewed by Salon’s Tracy Clark Flory “There is no compelling reason to think that larger numbers of sexual partners are truly ‘causing’ less happiness…It’s more likely that the reverse is true. I find Ms. Right; she makes me happy; I then don’t need to look for any other sexual partners.” In other words, actually having sex with more people isn’t making women unhappy but rather the frustrating fact that they haven’t found Mr. Right.
Arguments like Douthat’s which twist stats to prove a personal moral issue, do nothing but reinforce negative societal stereotypes. The truth is finding Mr/Ms. Right is a frustrating and difficult process; the unluckier you are in your pursuit often the unhappier you can appear to be in the time being. However in the end, when Mr/Ms Right is found Mr/Ms Wrong, whether that number is 2 or 200, really doesn’t matter.
Filed under Feminist Rant, Low Brow, Magazine, Newspapers, Sex
I have reread a recent Slate article a few times, and each time I am left hoping the majority of women don’t believe this crap. It claims the recent devaluation of sex has given women a disadvantage. Sex is now easier to get and therefore women can gain much less from it. For example, since a recent college grad can easily get sex, he is less willing to commit to his girlfriend.
The proof comes from statistics showing couples choose to have sex earlier in the relationship as well as a “survey” showing that men are more likely to have sex with a stranger and not feel bad about it. This is paired with some narratives of young women frustrated because their boyfriends won’t commit.
This article and its proof does seem to show that sex is becoming less of a bargaining chip in relationships, but I can’t seem to see why this is a bad thing. If sex is taken out of the equation as a bargaining chip perhaps men and women can both start enjoying sex for sex and stop thinking about all the potential implications. Maybe if sex the power of sex is taken away, then couples can start focusing on what really matters, a mutually supportive relationship.
Read the Salon interview for more insight into the facts here.
Filed under Feminist Rant, Low Brow, Magazine, Sex
Thanks to the release of Kay Hymowitz’s new book “Manning Up,” everyone from NPR to Salon to your local bloggers seems to have an opinion on the current “pre-adulthood” state of young men. Hymowtiz’s hypothesis, which is based heavily on pop culture references, suggests that unlike previous generations, young men today are unwilling to grow up, give up the playstation and become a flourishing part of society… and all because young women are growing up faster and more successfully.
It is hard to tell if Hymowitz’s argument is trying to blame the victim (damn those over-aggressive young feminists scaring young men away from success, they deserve to deal with the pathetic outcome) or be the voice of a disapproving, guilt-inducing mother (time to straighten up young men and produce some grand babies). Either way it seems less than convicing to most because of its over-generalizations and reliance on hit movies to support her argument instead of facts. (Read NPR’s review and exerts here.)
As Salon writer Tracy Clark-Flory says “there is certainly some truth here — but, unfortunately, she relies on oblique statistics and pop culture observations instead of talking to the men she’s writing about. ” Read her full response plus the response of some real young men here.
And yet when I was reading exerts from Hymowitz’s book, I couldn’t help but feel some twinges of familiarity when reading the descriptions of child-men: “It’s looking pretty clear that ten or fifteen years of party-on single life are a good formula for producing navel-gazing, wisecracking childmen rather than unhyphenated, unironic men.” Despite not having the facts and figures to back it up, I feel myself agreeing with Hymowtiz’s hypotheis, even if it is only based on my own small experience in the world.
No one would deny the past few years have been rough particularly on young people just starting out in the world, trying to make their path in society and finding more dead ends than promising roads. And yet when I talk to my female friends, I find we have found a way to adapt; we have put our pride aside, taken positions for less money with less than appealing titles and worked to make our way even if that way was not on the previously drawn map. We are looking at going back for master’s degrees, taking on bigger projects at work, and moving up in our fields despite the recession. We may not be looking to get married, have babies and enter that “adulthood” but we are looking to better ourselves and create our own place in society.
And yet the guys we are dating are routinely disappointing (of course with delightlful exceptions). It is not that they don’t call, don’t open doors, don’t pay for dates (although they routinely don’t); it is that they are lacking any ambition or plan for their futures but seem filled to the brim with excuses for their stagnant lives: the economy, their stupid boss, their parents, society’s unrealistic expectations. They are not just navelgazers but navel-buriers; they have buried themselves and their futures in their own unrealistic world and expectations.
I have no facts to support these claims other than my occasionally humorous and often painful personal history. Yet despite my personal experience, I do not think today’s young men deserve the hyphens. Although I suspect Hymowitz’s observations are true because they resonate in my own life, I am beginning to believe her man-child conclusion is flawed.
Young men today just like young women are struggling to find their place in a changing society. The majority of young men and women of today do not get married at 21 and have babies, they do not have the obvious, visible entrance into adulthood. Instead they often have a decade of creating their own identities, of finding their place in society and of negotiating their hyphens. It seems that young women seem to accomplish this task in a more socially acceptable way, by getting jobs, supporting themselves and creating an independent life. Young men seem to be taking a different more frustrating route to self-discovery.
This can be baffling for older generations used to a certain formula. And yet there is not much to be done except maybe write more books about “preadulthood” and lament the good ole days. As for the frustrated young women out there, all I can say is some young men find themselves earlier and in less infuriating ways. So stop making excuses for the child-men who are still trying to start a band living off food stamps and their parent’s naive generosity and dump them. This 20-somethings decade is way too short to spend it writing angry blog posts about the disappointing men in life.
Filed under Feminist Rant, Low Brow, Magazine, Radio, Sex
A recent article on CNN Health posed the 21st century, post-Sex-in-the-City question many American women are all too familiar with these days: “Should women have sex like men?”
The article was overflowing with generalities, short on science and overall disappointingly shallow when dealing with the complexities of female sexuality. As its crowning proof of the inability of women to have string-less sex “like men”, the article cited a 32-year-old woman battling “post-orgasm regret” a bout of depression that developed right after orgasming. One woman cries a little after sex and suddenly all women are unable have sex without those pesky sentiments of love?
The problem with the article and the general debate in society about how women “should” or “should not” have sex is all in the wording. Sex should never be an issue of what an individual “should” or “should not” do; it should be a discussion about what an individual WANTS to do.
The question should be do women want to have sex “like men” or sex without emotional attachment. That is a debate likely to be as multi-dimensional as “what is the government’s role in the recession recovery” or “what is your favorite sexual position?” Everyone has a different opinion, and one that is likely to change over time and experience.
We (this includes the men folk here) need to stop telling ourselves what we should or should not be doing and start really investigating what we want. There will be times in many women’s lives when they want string-less, emotion-less and hopefully orgasm-full sex. There will be times in many men’s lives when they are sick of the hook-up culture or are never into it to start. When we start listening to want we want and not what society tells us we want, we will all be a whole lot healthier, happier and hornier.
Debunking a few CNN misconceptions
1.
From CNN: “Many years before Candace Bushnell put pen to paper, Nobel Prize-winning author Doris Lessing wrote, on the subject of sexual freedom, “Men get erections when they’re with a woman they don’t give a damn about, but we don’t have an orgasm unless we love him. What’s free about that?”
From Reality: Women orgasm with or without love everyday. Some women can’t orgasm even with all that oxytocin and love. Some women can orgasm without even knowing someone’s name. However, for the record, if you can’t orgasm without love, accept that and stop having loveless sex. In this case, all the faking in the world won’t help you make it.
2.
From CNN: “Oxytocin helps facilitate a sense of attachment. But if there’s nothing to attach to, if there’s no deeper emotional content or meaningfulness, orgasm could become a regretful reminder of the hollowness of the sex that preceded it.”
From Reality: Does this mean there are millions of women out there emotionally attached to their vibrators? Orgasms can create oxytocin which can facilitate attachment. Orgasms can also be an incredible muscle spasm leading to extreme relaxation and passing out 5 minutes after sex. The roll over and sleep maneuver isn’t reserved for men. Seriously, not all women love to cuddle.
3.
From CNN: “A woman is less likely to have orgasms early in a relationship. Her body needs time to adapt to the new partner, to learn to trust him or her, and to relax into the knowledge that her partner accepts and appreciates her body.”
From Reality: This may be true for many women, and for others it is complete shit. Anyone ever seen 9 ½ weeks? The one-night stand exists for a reason and it is not just to please the man. Women like exciting adventurous sex too.
Conclusion: It is time to start really thinking about the who, what, when, where and why of sex on a personal level and let go of the should. We all know we can have sex like Samantha but do we want to? And just because we want to be Samantha one day doesn’t mean the next we can’t want to be a born-again virgin. The rule book never helped much any way. Throw it out and create your own sexual should’s. Number one: Sex should always feel good.
3rd Wave in the 2nd City: A Blog for Today's Chicago Feminist 