More on Female Chauvinist Pigs

I spent a while talking to Melinda Gallagher of CAKE at the party at BED on Thursday for the CAKE book and Ian Kerner's He Comes Next, and we talked about Ariel Levy's Female Chauvinist Pigs. It was an interesting discussion, and Carly Milne has now posted her take on the book, which I'll quote in part:

The pro-sex feminists I know don’t walk down the street in crotch-length skirts and stripper heels, and bend over in the name of hailing a cab. The pro-sex feminists I know aren’t talking about how they hate other girls and have better friendships with guys or other girls who act like guys. The pro-sex feminists I know don’t think anyone is anything other than their own individual for not wanting to watch porn, go to a live sex show, or do anything else they don’t want to do. What they are doing, however, is writing thoughtful commentary, asking questions, getting answers and encouraging open minds and discussion when it comes to sexuality and all things related to it.

I think Carly hits the nail on the head in expressing that, yes, some women are choosing some of these "raunchy" behaviors due to disturbing cultural trends, but on the other hand, who's to say what's an okay reason and what's not? What I'm looking to explore are ways to expand the definition of sexual freedom for everyone, men and women alike, those who want to save sex for marriage, those who never want to get married, those who may be just figuring things out. Instead, shame, fear, reputation, puritanism and other problematic dynamics come into play when it comes to sex, making it a culture of judgment - who's had "too much" or the wrong kind of sex, what will liking X sex act say about me, what will even pondering X sex act say about me? Where I feel Levy failed is in heaping further shame and blame upon these women, instead of really figuring out a) if what they're doing is so harmful and b) what might actually empower them sexually. I truly believe that liberating our fantasies, encouraging more open dialogue -- even if it means that we learn that, say, lifelong monogamy is not what's foremost in our fantasies -- is a healthy thing. What we do with that dialogue and those thoughts is something else, but I don't think we're even at the stage where we can say we're free mentally to ponder our own private sexual utopias. Some of us may be, but certainly not everyone, and I think that's so inhibiting. And maybe in some ways what Levy's talking about is a response to that - it's a chance for girls to truly "go wild" and be encouraged for it. Of course I think there should be and encourage a wider range of acceptable ways for women, and men, to "go wild," without hurting themselves or others in the process.

Sexuality encompasses a lot more than just what we do in our beds, and it seems that in part what we say about sex, how open we are, is just as threatening to some people as what we do with our bodies. If we don't have room to express ourselves, to truly be our sexual selves in and out of the bedroom, then we're not truly free and I think if you asked most any dominatrix or hooker they'd tell you, especially about, say, their married clients, that they are expressing something within that commercial relationship they feel or are unable to express in their marriages. And maybe I'm hopelessly naive, but I would wish for those people a better match in that arena. Not to diss on sex workers, and I'm sure that arrangement works fine for some, but I can't imagine it doesn't come with some of its own degree of mental discomfort or longing, which is why I can't see sexual freedom as only a women's issue in any sense.