Comments on: Hang up those clitorii girls, the under 30’s set is coming to town http://punkassblog.com/2006/08/29/hang-up-those-clitorii-girls-the-under-30s-set-is-coming-to-town/ Fri, 21 Nov 2008 00:59:27 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.3 By: Jimmy Ho http://punkassblog.com/2006/08/29/hang-up-those-clitorii-girls-the-under-30s-set-is-coming-to-town/#comment-7483 Jimmy Ho Thu, 31 Aug 2006 17:47:45 +0000 http://punkassblog.com/2006/08/29/hang-up-those-clitorii-girls-the-under-30s-set-is-coming-to-town/#comment-7483 Isn't that the Esther Vilar (<i>The Manipulated Man</i>) school of thought? Isn’t that the Esther Vilar (The Manipulated Man) school of thought?

]]> By: Kyria http://punkassblog.com/2006/08/29/hang-up-those-clitorii-girls-the-under-30s-set-is-coming-to-town/#comment-7478 Kyria Thu, 31 Aug 2006 16:30:41 +0000 http://punkassblog.com/2006/08/29/hang-up-those-clitorii-girls-the-under-30s-set-is-coming-to-town/#comment-7478 So many of the pro-"empowerment" women, from strippers to fellatrices, seem to be talking in particular about the "power" to hold men in some type of sexual thrall. This strikes me as a very old sort of power, and a really poor revenge for second-class citizenship. Further, when does such a woman get to enjoy sexual thrall herself, without being "disempowered"? So many of the pro-”empowerment” women, from strippers to fellatrices, seem to be talking in particular about the “power” to hold men in some type of sexual thrall.

This strikes me as a very old sort of power, and a really poor revenge for second-class citizenship. Further, when does such a woman get to enjoy sexual thrall herself, without being “disempowered”?

]]> By: piny http://punkassblog.com/2006/08/29/hang-up-those-clitorii-girls-the-under-30s-set-is-coming-to-town/#comment-7453 piny Thu, 31 Aug 2006 04:46:44 +0000 http://punkassblog.com/2006/08/29/hang-up-those-clitorii-girls-the-under-30s-set-is-coming-to-town/#comment-7453 I don't agree that women's sexuality--the desire to have a partner, the desire to please a partner--was always seen as animalistic and deviant; like bellatrys said, I'm a freaking moron and the sexless angel of the house was rather a limited archetype. I think that the new ingredient isn't empowering sexuality. I think it's empowerment, period. I think it's the idea that independent empowerment for women is something we should be concerned with on any level through fulfillment of any role. Women have been encouraged to be sexy, either as whores or as wives, and often been told that they would reach some sort of fulfillment--sexual, romantic, self--through doing so. The difference is that now women are becoming agents rather than servants, at least on a level that requires adjustment in the calculi used to sell patriarchal sexuality to women. Now, you're doing it for you. I don’t agree that women’s sexuality–the desire to have a partner, the desire to please a partner–was always seen as animalistic and deviant; like bellatrys said, I’m a freaking moron and the sexless angel of the house was rather a limited archetype.

I think that the new ingredient isn’t empowering sexuality. I think it’s empowerment, period. I think it’s the idea that independent empowerment for women is something we should be concerned with on any level through fulfillment of any role. Women have been encouraged to be sexy, either as whores or as wives, and often been told that they would reach some sort of fulfillment–sexual, romantic, self–through doing so. The difference is that now women are becoming agents rather than servants, at least on a level that requires adjustment in the calculi used to sell patriarchal sexuality to women. Now, you’re doing it for you.

]]> By: Creek Running North http://punkassblog.com/2006/08/29/hang-up-those-clitorii-girls-the-under-30s-set-is-coming-to-town/#comment-7448 Creek Running North Thu, 31 Aug 2006 03:45:46 +0000 http://punkassblog.com/2006/08/29/hang-up-those-clitorii-girls-the-under-30s-set-is-coming-to-town/#comment-7448 <strong>How many radical feminists does it take to screw in a lightbulb?...</strong> Can we please have just one of these discussions without someone jumping in to give the light bulb's point of view? ... How many radical feminists does it take to screw in a lightbulb?…

Can we please have just one of these discussions without someone jumping in to give the light bulb's point of view?
…

]]> By: Creek Running North http://punkassblog.com/2006/08/29/hang-up-those-clitorii-girls-the-under-30s-set-is-coming-to-town/#comment-7447 Creek Running North Thu, 31 Aug 2006 03:44:03 +0000 http://punkassblog.com/2006/08/29/hang-up-those-clitorii-girls-the-under-30s-set-is-coming-to-town/#comment-7447 <strong>How many sex-positive feminists does it take to screw in a lightbulb?...</strong> Oh, so now you're making fun of how we screw in lightbulbs? What's with all the damn slut-shaming? ... How many sex-positive feminists does it take to screw in a lightbulb?…

Oh, so now you're making fun of how we screw in lightbulbs? What's with all the damn slut-shaming?
…

]]> By: Lorenzo http://punkassblog.com/2006/08/29/hang-up-those-clitorii-girls-the-under-30s-set-is-coming-to-town/#comment-7445 Lorenzo Thu, 31 Aug 2006 03:15:06 +0000 http://punkassblog.com/2006/08/29/hang-up-those-clitorii-girls-the-under-30s-set-is-coming-to-town/#comment-7445 Piny, Where I'm having trouble is that I'm failing to see the equivalence between a discourse that talked about women's sexuality as 'animalistic' and deviant from the ideal vs. a discourse that talked about women's sexuality as 'empowering' and as the ideal, so to speak. The discourse of the sexual revolution, since the 1950's, has promoted this objectified sexuality as empowering as as the norm rather than as an animalistic 'itch' (to borrow bellatry's phrase) that was acknowleged but also treated as deviant from the social ideal, at least it seems to me. Piny,

Where I’m having trouble is that I’m failing to see the equivalence between a discourse that talked about women’s sexuality as ‘animalistic’ and deviant from the ideal vs. a discourse that talked about women’s sexuality as ‘empowering’ and as the ideal, so to speak. The discourse of the sexual revolution, since the 1950’s, has promoted this objectified sexuality as empowering as as the norm rather than as an animalistic ‘itch’ (to borrow bellatry’s phrase) that was acknowleged but also treated as deviant from the social ideal, at least it seems to me.

]]> By: PoliSi http://punkassblog.com/2006/08/29/hang-up-those-clitorii-girls-the-under-30s-set-is-coming-to-town/#comment-7398 PoliSi Wed, 30 Aug 2006 17:29:21 +0000 http://punkassblog.com/2006/08/29/hang-up-those-clitorii-girls-the-under-30s-set-is-coming-to-town/#comment-7398 Brava! You have distilled the very meaning of sex-positive feminism as I understand it, which I can somehow never manage when I try to put it into words. I just don't understand how some so-called sex-positive people get an entirely different definition, that as far as I can tell consists of, "All sex is good!" when clearly not all of it is. Brava!

You have distilled the very meaning of sex-positive feminism as I understand it, which I can somehow never manage when I try to put it into words.

I just don’t understand how some so-called sex-positive people get an entirely different definition, that as far as I can tell consists of, “All sex is good!” when clearly not all of it is.

]]> By: amaz0n http://punkassblog.com/2006/08/29/hang-up-those-clitorii-girls-the-under-30s-set-is-coming-to-town/#comment-7390 amaz0n Wed, 30 Aug 2006 15:33:20 +0000 http://punkassblog.com/2006/08/29/hang-up-those-clitorii-girls-the-under-30s-set-is-coming-to-town/#comment-7390 <i>The pop culture of the 1600 and 1700s is full of humorous dismay about how girls these days don’t need guys to get off, they take care of it themselves or for each other with beeswax candles instead!</i> Slow down. <i>Beeswax candles?</i> The pop culture of the 1600 and 1700s is full of humorous dismay about how girls these days don’t need guys to get off, they take care of it themselves or for each other with beeswax candles instead!

Slow down.

Beeswax candles?

]]> By: piny http://punkassblog.com/2006/08/29/hang-up-those-clitorii-girls-the-under-30s-set-is-coming-to-town/#comment-7367 piny Wed, 30 Aug 2006 03:53:13 +0000 http://punkassblog.com/2006/08/29/hang-up-those-clitorii-girls-the-under-30s-set-is-coming-to-town/#comment-7367 That having been said, I'm not sure it makes sense to bring Murasaki--or Sappho, or Catherine de Pisan, or the Venus of Willendorf, or whoever--into a discussion of the impact of the sexual revolution. Does that not imply a temporal limit to the debate in the first place? That having been said, I’m not sure it makes sense to bring Murasaki–or Sappho, or Catherine de Pisan, or the Venus of Willendorf, or whoever–into a discussion of the impact of the sexual revolution. Does that not imply a temporal limit to the debate in the first place?

]]> By: piny http://punkassblog.com/2006/08/29/hang-up-those-clitorii-girls-the-under-30s-set-is-coming-to-town/#comment-7365 piny Wed, 30 Aug 2006 03:48:53 +0000 http://punkassblog.com/2006/08/29/hang-up-those-clitorii-girls-the-under-30s-set-is-coming-to-town/#comment-7365 <em>Most of the things used as shorthand for female sexuality under patriarchy–high heels, fishnets, receptive joyfree sex–were expected of women prior to the sexual revolution. No. This is a gross oversimplification and/or demonstration of ignorance of most of world history. Women not being supposed to enjoy sex? </em> Where in that out-of-context quote do you see the phrase "all women?" Yeah, me neither. I know from the Wife of Bath. I didn't say that the idea that women are supposed to enjoy sex dates back to the seventies, for one thing, and you're not the first person to bring virgin/whore into the conversation, either. We're not arguing about female sexiness as a longstanding tradition, or that people have been thinking about female sexual gratification for some time. I was disputing Lorenzo's temporal dichotomies, which I'm still having trouble getting behind. "Joyfree" might have been ill-chosen--the phenomenon I was getting at was more the woman whose sexual gratification is defined wholly in terms of her male partner's--but I'm not ignorant. Most of the things used as shorthand for female sexuality under patriarchy–high heels, fishnets, receptive joyfree sex–were expected of women prior to the sexual revolution.

No. This is a gross oversimplification and/or demonstration of ignorance of most of world history.

Women not being supposed to enjoy sex?

Where in that out-of-context quote do you see the phrase “all women?” Yeah, me neither. I know from the Wife of Bath. I didn’t say that the idea that women are supposed to enjoy sex dates back to the seventies, for one thing, and you’re not the first person to bring virgin/whore into the conversation, either. We’re not arguing about female sexiness as a longstanding tradition, or that people have been thinking about female sexual gratification for some time. I was disputing Lorenzo’s temporal dichotomies, which I’m still having trouble getting behind. “Joyfree” might have been ill-chosen–the phenomenon I was getting at was more the woman whose sexual gratification is defined wholly in terms of her male partner’s–but I’m not ignorant.

]]>