Does penetration = presumption of power/control?

stripeybump - There is a clear divide on this thread between posters who think that PIV sex is naturally and biologically the ultimate sexual activity for both men and women, and those who think that PIV sex is put on a pedestal by men through the media and other patriarchal means.

I'm one of those who has said that I think there's a natural, biological urge for PIV in most men and women. That's not the same as saying it's the ultimate sexual activity. I think it's a natural biological urge and I think it's put on a pedestal by the patriarchy. Just because it's natural doesn't mean it serves us well in the modern world where the vast majority of sex is for pleasure.

You know, this:

'If "sex" was going down on someone while wearing a hat with a picture of a gherkin on it, all the films would show people sexily donning gherkin hats and fade to the fire/out the window as they headed south.'

and this:

'It would be much easier if it was all a conspiracy. Then we could send in Tom Hanks (or some female, feminist equivalent) to hunt down the group of people in the room with the strings, uncover the whole thing and get on with our lives.'

Make me remember why MN feminists are so bloody brilliant.

It would be much easier if it was all a conspiracy. Then we could send in Tom Hanks (or some female, feminist equivalent) to hunt down the group of people in the room with the strings, uncover the whole thing and get on with our lives.

Unfortunately it is about social institutions and systems, which are made up of lots of people and their thoughts and behaviour. Which is why we all keep discussing what our thoughts and behaviour are, and how they came to be that way, and if we could or should change them.

If "sex" was going down on someone while wearing a hat with a picture of a gherkin on it, all the films would show people sexily donning gherkin hats and fade to the fire/out the window as they headed south.

PiV is sex in patriarchy, it is considered the ultimate act and all others are lesser. Thus excluding loads of peoples sex lives from even being considered sex.

Which is just stupid.

Personally, I don;t think that PiV is the most intimate thing you can do with someone. When I was younger and discussed it with my friends, they said the same.

Surely what people see as the most intimate thing will vary between people.

Also on hollywood, there is no reason why a different sex act might not be there in place of the usual PiV. The reason none of us raise an eyebrow at PiV being represented in films sometimes with quite low certificates is because it is the patriarchal default of what sex is. Hollywood reflects society, not vice versa.

(Btw, I think PIV is my favourite - but I would be the first to admit my sex life isn't wide and varied! )

I don't get what you're saying 'nope' to, posie?

PIV isn't physically possible for some people. So?

As I said before, if you read the thread, you will see that some people do equate PIV with 'proper' sex. You don't, but that doesn't mean it's not an issue.

And I'm not sure any woman with a wide and varied sex life would cite PIV as their favourite and most pleasurable sex.

Nope, connection is physical...the meeting of minds and bodies, enjoyment and so on is available in a plethora of ways,. Anal sex is not physically possible for some people. And I haven't used the term 'proper sex'.

Indeedy so, start. Just thinking out loud I guess.

... what I'm getting at is, it may not be a 'conspiracy' in the sense that insider trading is a conspiracy, but it ain't coincidence either.

When you say it's not a conspiracy - I agree in the sense that there aren't a secret group of misogynists sitting in an office somewhere pulling the strings. But there is a structure in society that coerces us, and that structure is part of a larger set of structures (including religion, as you say) that reinforce each other and perpetuate these ideas about sex that are not good for women, and sometimes (as sakura says) actively bad for women.

I don't think doing the Bechdel test ruins film enjoyment; it just gives you a tool for picking films that don't require you to watch them with some kind of cognitive dissonance.

Me too. Don't ever ruin your film enjoyment by doing the Bechdel test.

I don't think it's proper but I don't think it's a conspiracy against women, I think it's more about anything deviating is unnecessary to reproduce. I think it's a religious thing, which I guess is a male thing.....

oops full circle.

posie, the fact it was homosexual sex is part of my point. The automatic equation of PIV to 'proper' sex is homophobic as well as sexist. Likewise, the fact that Hollywood sex is for the male gaze is a bit of an issue for me as a feminist, too.

Ah LRD, that was between men. And all sex in Hollywood is for the male gaze, look at Sharon Stone wanking in the bath without using her hands!!

And I can't imagine, maybe this is me, saying 'I love you' with a mouth full of cock!!

Whilst I do see that PIV is the most pushed acceptable sex I can't help feeling it's a hangover from religion and sex being dirty except for procreation, sex is not supposed to be fun. I'm not sure it is the patriarchy alone although religion is a male construct that's purpose above and beyond anything else is to oppress women, control fertility etc. FGM doesn't come out of concern for a woman's enjoyment of even PIV, however.

I also agree that the media forces 'making love' that is apparently guaranteed to achieve mutual orgasm, but I can't imagine that shapes every grown woman's sex life.

Btw, I've never struggled with eye-contact during cunnilingus/blow jobs - you just look up, don't you?

Sorry, posie, I just don't follow what you're trying to say.

I understood that post I quoted to refer to PIV in the context of intimacy, and I think that's also what you're saying in your last post, so am I to ignore the post where you changed your mind, or am I misunderstanding whether or not you did change your mind?

I'm not suggesting you shouldn't feel PIV is intimate if it is to you - that's lovely and I like PIV too. But the point is, not everyone feels like that, and all of us are heavily socially conditioned to feel like that, despite the obvious disadvantages of PIV for women. Hence this whole discussion.

I don't really see why Hollywood shouldn't show other sex than PIV - of course it should! Would be great. Just look at the positive reaction Brokeback Mountain got, for an example.

Ah, okay that was about mainstream Hollywood, so you think it should have a plethora of anal, mutual masturbation and 69ers to show 'sex'?

And I was shocked because I had posted about intimacy and close bodies, kissing and eye contact but that post seems to have disappeared.

I still think the intimacy of PIV is the total connection of two bodies which is not possible, for many people, any other way.

'WE're not told that PIV is better than anything else, it's a natural urge for most people that sexual encounters lead to this. It's how you and I both came to be here. And the thought that Hollywood movies don't show other sex is purely because other sex acts are more about sex than 'love making' and intimacy. A blow job, cunninglingus cannot have long loving looks.'

• quoted from posieparker on p. 15 (emphases mine).

Someone stole your computer and posted this under your name then posie?

I purposely didn't say PIV when discussing intimacy.