Does penetration = presumption of power/control?

x-posts

It can be argued (as with most of these things) that the effect of a patriarchal view doesn't just affect women adversely but also men who cannot measure up to the patriarchal ideal.

So the idea that penetrative sex is the be-all and end-all isn't just a bit of a problem for women who prefer other activities, girls who aren't ready, women who don't have access to contraception/ante-natal support, and women who find the contraceptive choices available unsuitable for them.

It is also a bit of a problem for men with erectile problems, premature ejaculation and that sort of stuff.

Of course lots of people live PiV and that is the natural climax of their sexual encounters. But for a lot of people for lots of reasons it would be better if this were not seen as the "ultimate" almost to the exclusion of other activities. And in our culture it most definitely is seen as the ultimate act even though many people actually find other acts more initimite.

If it were seen that sex included a range of behaviours, all of which "counted", then the pressure would be off for men to "perform" and for girls to "let him" and all the rest of it.

SQ - I see why you think that, but I think it's more to do with Sakura's position early in the thread about a feminist aim being to reduce the amount of PIV sex in an equal society, and wondering what sex would look like in a non-patriarchal society.

I and others (I think) were protesting that actually, PIV is the main part of our current sex lives and we are not interested in changing that.

I tried to reconcile my own desire for PIV sex (which I see as a fundamentally unequal activity) with my desire to be in an otherwise equal relationship, and further extrapolated into female relationships with men and how they may be affected by PIV sex.

I posted ages ago upthread about the chicken / egg situation: I think PIV sex is a cause of societal inequality, not an effect of it.

Sb, I understand your point, but I think there is a big difference between trust and submission within a consensual relationship. I don't see that there is anything more submissive about sex than there is about, say, climbing a mountain with somebody who could use their greater physical power to trip you up/push you off.

Hopefully when most people are in a trusting/consensual relationship the idea that somebody might be intending to hurt you sexually is not a plausible scenario.

The inequality of it is then about the unintentional harm that can happen, now matter how good the intentions of both people involved.

On a separate issue, I don't think the issue here is that most women don't want PIV sex, but an issue of how frequently they want it and at what point in their lives they want to have it. There are clearly differences between the choices of a 16 year old, a 20 year old with no children and a 25 year old who gave birth a couple of weeks ago. As for it being a biological necessity, well for procreative purposes, you only need to do it a few times in your life.

I don't think that being a lesbian has much to do with whether or not people enjoy the physical experience of being penetrated. Why would it? People don't have a sexual orientation based on preference for orgasm through the clitoris or g spot. But it seems that some heterosexual women feel the need to defend why their sexual experiences are mostly about PIV, which I'm surprised by, because I didn't realise it was the main part of sex for so many people. I don't think there is a need to defend it on the basis that it is enjoyable, because nobody is suggesting it isn't.

She did say, for what it is worth, that she finds the personal and political a bit hard to reconcile and, in all fairness, she did say this may make her a bit of a hypocrite (well, no crime in that).

So you don't think it's interesting that almost everyone who posted made sure to state that they enjoy PiV sex?

I think it is really interesting personally but obviously you don't have to agree!

I was just re-reading Sakura's posts, and she does as far as I can see, agree with me that PIV sex is an unequal activity in terms of power.

She also by her own admission says that she found that sex for her went downhill after starting to have PIV instead of other sexual activity which she found more satisfying.

I do wish she'd return to the thread to discuss her views further.

As for your point, I personally do not feel dominated / submissive when I have sex, whether it ends in copulation or otherwise. Which is why I find it hard to discuss the point that you want to discuss.

Sakura was amongst the number who posted to say how much they liked PiV.

Something that seems to be overlooked for some reason.

stripey why on earth do you think that is aimed at you?

The vast majority of posters on this thread have said they like PiV, love it, can't get enough etc. I find it very interesting that people have felt the need to proclaim that, and I think the reason is to pre-empt attack.

Also, SQ, Sakura did post early on that it should be an aim to prevent people from having PIV sex, which has totally confused many posters, as the vast, vast majority of women do want PIV sex so why should aiming to reduce it be a feminist aim? I wish Sakura would return to discuss this as I find it very confusing.

SQ - please don't be so insulting, my post isn't 'I love cock' Silly and reductive post.

I am one of the vast, vast majority of women who enjoys PIV sex because it is a biological necessity. That's a reasonable starting point, non? I'm not claiming there is anything special about me or my experience - quite the contrary, I am the most common sexuality out there - yes lesbians and some other women don't necessarily want PIV, but until someone posts a link to data suggesting most women don't want PIV sex, surely it's more sensible to take this as a starting point?

I just put my finger on something about this thread that is quite amusing.

The vast majority of women who have added to the conversation have been very careful to say "well personally I love a bit of cock up me". Presumably as a pre-emptive strike against the inevitable calls of - you're against PiV because you're a hairy lesbian who can't get a man and you hate sex anyway blah blah blah. So pretty much everyone has very quickly shouted "I love a bit of cock" before talking about the topic.

And still people are piling in with accusations of man hating and all the rest of it.

And the awful thing is, that the necessity of saying "ooh I love a bit of cock" excludes a whole load of people from the conversation who actually don't like a bit of cock, thanks, or can't have a bit of cock for some reason... And they are excluded for no reason because everyone loudly nailing their colours to the mast as red-blooded heterosexuals who like it up 'em has done nothing to prevent people saying all the things that people were trying to stop them saying.

GAH!!!

Thanks littleblue - v useful!

I'd push my point though about participating in PIV sex being a submissive act for women. It's connected to the issue of physical harm - I have to trust my partner completely to allow him to penetrate me. He could do so without my consent, but I couldn't make him penetrate me / I couldn't enclose him without his consent. Therefore I have to allow him to do something to me and trust that he will not hurt me.

I'm not a passive person in sex and enjoy dominant positions, but importantly for this debate, I am aware of my male partner's superior physical strength and how this relates to the simple physical act of penetration.

I am opening up, welcoming, enveloping - he is strengthening to push into me. It's an obvious physical difference that I tried to argue earlier is unavoidable when discussing PIV sex and equality.

I think inequality of physical power during PIV sex is utterly obvious and for my part am confused that more posters don't agree.

Given that people enjoy it and want it, the question isn't how we can stop men wanting PIV sex from their partners but how we can prevent the inequality in the bedroom from influencing how men see women generally.

I'm going to do a summary of the arguments on the thread because so many posts are arguing against points that were never made.

Consensual PIV sex may be seen as having an unequal power dynamic because:

1. On a psychological level, some women feel submissive when they do it (as argued by SB).
2. On a cultural level, we have phrases like 'getting fucked' which have connotations of submission (can't remember who said this).
3. The person being impregnated is at risk of pregnancy and/or the side effects of contraception, and there are greater physical risks associated with being penetrated than penetrating people (as argued by radical feminists).
4. Many women don't orgasm from PIV sex alone, so women may prefer to engage in other sexual acts but don't get enough of them because men want PIV (sort of as argued by Sakura).

I think 1 is controversial if we try to generalise beyond an individual's own experience. 2-4 seem obvious and commonly discussed by women. It would seem that penetration is a minority activity in lesbian sex and in masturbation by women regardless of sexual orientation, so penetration may be important as part of a straight relationship but is only a small part of sexual pleasure for women. I am surprised that people think this is some big deal. My heterosexual sexual experiences have always, in terms of time, been mostly about female sexual pleasure other than penetration and only a small amount of the overall time is about penetration. Conversations I have had with friends led me to believe this was common. I do not understand why Sakura's points have caused such a stir.

I think you are being unduly picky in your reading of SFs post as well.

I have to go for a bit now and indulge in some quality family time doing group blitz tidying...!

"PIV is not unequal unless the two people doing it are not equal,"

But this goes to the heart of it, surely, in that women and men are not equal (in the most part, around the world).

The feminist in me is slowly dying, the more I read on this board.

One sentence, one post same meaning isn't it. And I didn't lie, I was mistaken.

PIV is not unequal unless the two people doing it are not equal, unless the act is unlawful or oppressive.

the woman got pg and then died after a botched abortion. and there was the hero (ffs) whose wife seemed to have incurable pnd which came about after she had a baby after he raped her.

this idea that piv sex is equally risk free, equally fabulous for men and women is very limited to a specific time and place.

I assume there is some link between the ideas?