I have seen the term “sex positive” pop up a lot in the blog world lately, but I am still not entirely sure what it means.
I think I have a better grasp on what it is to be “sex negative.”
To me, that would be someone who considers sex and sexuality to be shameful and dirty and wrong, especially for women, who should consider it their distasteful duty to their husbands. I also think those who only want sex to be reserved for reproduction -- no contraceptives for you! -- are sex negative, since it’s pretty clear that sexuality is about a lot more than just baby-making.
Then, there was the woman I met in college who told me all heterosexual sex was rape because of the inequity between men and women in the patriarchy. Only lesbians, according to her, could have consensual sex. That seemed a bit sex negative to me, and I considered her sex negative.
Being sex positive, on the other hand, should be pretty simple, right? As I initially understood it, someone who is sex positive is comfortable with their sexuality and is not ashamed of having sex and enjoying sex as often as possible.
I have always felt being sex positive meant understanding there are different kinds of sexual expression, and that, as long as all parties involved are consenting adults and no one gets hurt, it’s all good.
But it really isn’t that simple, is it? I specifically used the word “adults” above because, while I realize kids and teens are sexual beings (I know I was one), the idea of 12-year-olds having oral sex icks me out. Does that make me sex negative?
And back to adults again, I find much of mainstream pornography unappealing. What’s up with the ridiculous positions and uncomfortable settings? And why do the women give endless BJs (some clock in at 10 minutes, yes, I checked), while them getting head back is either much shorter (and the camera inevitably pans to her face and not her genitals) or non-existent. And when do the women come? Is that not important? And why, why, why must almost every film now end with him ejaculating in her face? Does feeling this way about the San Fernando Valley’s finest make me sex negative?
Does being appalled that so many young men and women no longer use condoms for multiple casual encounters make me sex negative? Am I sex negative for not thinking herpes is “so whatevs?”
Am I sex negative for having really mixed feelings about prostitution? That I worry that, for every happy Moonlite Bunny Ranch member there are 50 illegal immigrants from Eastern Europe and Asia in sexual slavery? Am I sex negative for wondering if the clientele is the same?
Anyway, I would love to hear what “sex positive” means to you. As you can tell, I’m kind of conflicted.
0 TrackBacks
Listed below are links to blogs that reference this entry: What does "sex positive" mean to you?.
TrackBack URL for this entry: http://www.feministing.com/cgi-bin/movabletype/mt-tb.fcgi/8516
Weekly Feministing Newsletter
Feministing RSS Feed
I hate the term "sex positive (feminist)." It sets up a false conflict between "sex positive" feminists and some other kind of feminist. "Sex positive" as opposed to what? Sex negative feminists? I don't know of any feminists who are anti-sex.
The term reminds me of the label "pro-life," which suggests that there exists a group of people out there who are anti-life or pro-death, when in reality, people who are not pro-life are anything but anti-life/pro-death. It's just a misleading term.
Why is the qualifier "sex positive" necessary when describing one's feminism?
SarahMC: It sets up a false conflict between "sex positive" feminists and some other kind of feminist. "Sex positive" as opposed to what? Sex negative feminists?
...
Why is the qualifier "sex positive" necessary when describing one's feminism?
I can think of two uses. One, to note sex-positivism as being a particularly important aspect of feminism for you personally. There are a lot of aspects to modern feminism (this being the reason I no longer self-identify as feminism despite being sex-egalitarian; too complicated a label), and while all or almost all feminists might agree on many issues, most will have differencing levels of personal attachment and dedication to individual sub-causes.
Two, to emphasis a connection between sex-positivism and feminism. If you read a description of a battle that includes the phrase "red blood," you don't sarcastically wonder, "Oh, I thought this was a battle between horseshoe crabs!" Same principle applies here; it's just for vividness.
I can tell you what it means to me... It focuses my feminist activism on causes that directly relate to sex. This includes; birth control and abortion, LGBTQ issues and concerns, rights for sex-trade workers, as well as the plain and simple right for all people to be sexual and individuals in their desires. I am also particularly concerned about sexual violence.
"If 98% of rapes are committed by men, why is it still a women's issue" - Quote from the DVDRB altered (originally about murdered partners) and used by myself in an article on Jane Doe for the local paper.
I know what I like when it comes to sex and I am open to discussing it with anyone at anytime. It helps a great deal as I work mostly with youth who are often very curious about the topic. Nothing is too gross or inappropriate for me.
I understand the problem with categorizing feminism into these various sections but in my social network it simply helps to clarify which issue we are most passionate about. It is not about creating a hierarchy related to each issues importance to the large feminist community, it is simply about each individuals personal interests and passions.
I'm with Sarah in that I think it creates a false divide. More radical sects of feminism tend to disapprove of what the "sex-pos" crowd usually deems feminist activity (porn, stripping, voluntary prostitution, etc all in the name of "women's choices"). Rad fems don't disapprove of or disrespect the women who take part in these things, but they do object to someone slapping a feminist label on them just because a woman made the choice. I wear make-up sometimes, but I'm not going to pretend that doing so is feminist.
More on-topic, I hate the term "sex-positive" because one, it posits that there is some group that is "sex-negative" when none really exists, and two, it operates under a very narrow definition of "sex". It's not anti-sex to examine how patriarchy affects sexual relationships. It's not anti-sex to oppose prostitution or stripping and the social ideology that led to their existence.
It seems to me that the label sex-positive is used by pro-porn, pro-sex work feminists to label themselves... but I have to agree with SarahMC, it is an absolutist sort of label. I don't think a lot of feminists are 100% pro porn or 100% pro sex work under any and all circumstances, and if they are I think they're missing a big part of the picture, because there is a lot of patriarchy infused into a lot of that stuff...
I consider myself sex positive because I'm happy and open about my sexuality and I feel strongly that it is important for everyone to be able to develop their sexuality in an unrestricted fashion... however I'm not sex positive if that means that all porn is a-ok (cause a lot of it is demeaning and doesn't focus on women's pleasure at all and promotes unrealistic body types etc etc), or that all sex work is ok (eg sexual slavery etc).
At the places I've worked in that were "sex-positive" (as in phone lines, a theatre company, etc) it usually meant being positive about peoples' rights to have consensual sex regardless of who they are having sex, when they are having sex, how they are having sex, how old they are (if they met the government's age of consent), what they used for sex, etc as long as it didn't jeapordize a person's dignity, self-respect, etc. The organizations also seemed to go by the policy of "safer sex is better sex" as in, if possible, a condom should be used, but respected that ultimately it was the individual's decision. Having said that, condoms and safer sex practices were not necessarily encouraged or advised, but we did educate people on safer sex steps that were relevant to them depending on the information they gave us (this is obviouslyabout the phone line i worked at rather than the theatre company...) and left it up to them about whether they chose to practice safer sex or not.
I thought Greta Christina put it really well:
""Sex-positivity isn't about being a cheerleader for sex, all sex, all the time. Sex-positivity is about seeing sex as an essential part of human life: as diverse as the human race, as ecstatic and sad and absurd as the people who are doing it."
I've read a lot of stuff in the feminist community and elsewhere that was sex-negative. I've heard feminists claim that consensual sex between a man and a woman is impossible and that porn is a horrible thing and that certain fetishes are evidence of mental illness.
I believe that you can't control you sexual urges, and that, even if they're kind of offensive, it's okay to try to satisfy them as long as you don't hurt anyone. I believe men who like tying up, spanking, and otherwise dominating women are perfectly normal, as long as they aren't raping anyone. There are lots of women out there who are into being on the receiving end of that, and there's nothing wrong with them, either. I don't see a Nazi fetish as evidence of anti-semitism. I don't have a problem with porn in and of itself, although I have some issues with the sketchy labor practices surrounding it. Moaning bottle openers make me giggle. Sex-positivity is understanding that sex is a part of life, and it's okay to nurture your sexuality, even when your fantasies seem to laugh in the face of political correctness.