Does being a RadFem mean that you can't like anything to do with males and PIV?

Still does for immense numbers of women across the globe.

There's a fascinating discussion to be had about the politics of PIV sex but not one that ever ends very happily on-line. Or IRL, to be fair.

Incidentally, now I've stopped using hormonal contraceptive (for 5 years now), my cycles have become increasingly reliable and I find it very easy to tell whereabouts in it I am.

Also STDs are transmitted more readily from man to woman than from woman to man. I think it's double the likelihood, but I'd have to check.

Sorry cross posted with sunshineandbooks

Well before the advent of modern medicine, the mortality rate from pregnancy was incredibly high.

Before she went into labour, as well as getting the swaddling clothes ready, a woman would also prepare two shrouds, one for her and one for the baby, in case they both died. The odds of which, were good.

So maybe the fact that PIV sex can result in pregnancy, meant it could also result in death? Maybe that's what she's getting at?

I define myself as a radical feminist. I get what the blogger is saying and relate to some of it, but I don't agree with all of it, will continue to enjoy PIV and do not think an anti-PIV stance is necessary to be a radical feminist.

I relate very much to her take on the risks of sex. As a woman who is determined to never use hormonal contraceptive again, I worry about pregnancy and although I use barrier methods I tend to enjoy PIV most at points in my cycle when I know conception is unlikely.

Thinking about my sexual experience, I've had some fantastic PIV but I've had far more great sex that didn't involve it. My ideal would be about 25%PIV/75% other sex I guess.

I do feel that PIV is often presented as the only form of sex worth having. Everything else seems to lead up to it. I think this is very much a patriarchal construct and is due to greater degree of importance placed on the male orgasm - which signifies the end of the act in many encounters. I can't help but feel that many women's sexual satisfaction would increase if less PIV took place and more oral sex/touching was involved. Of course, a considerate male lover means that this isn't a problem but I wonder how many women seem to have one of those...

I just read that article properly and whilst I think that most of it is bollocks and totally sucks the joy out of life and sex I do love the last line and think it is spot on;

'if we made PIV more traumatic for men, would they have the common decency to pick up the fucking phone the next day, but without going all stalker?'

Brilliant!

I don''t think that most women fear pregnancy in fact many women welcome pregnancy. Without sex we would die out and pregnancy does not result in death normally does it? Rather a new life. having said that it does effect us much more than it does them. Men can get stds and therefore sex is also dangerous for them but imo most of the best things in life carry an element of risk.

I thought that the reason why us women feel more bonded is partly to do with oxytocin the bonding chemical released on orgasm surely? But then I guess men must feel it too. It is within our interests to feel more bonded in case we concieve.

I don't see what is so anti feminist about having a bloody good shag though. Surely we don't need more of life's joys stripped away from us. I do agree that the partriarchy rubbishes women for having sex whilst men get applauded for it. Double standards. I ignore them and keep shagging around recklessly .

So piv is not the real issue it is the issue of contraception and control of that. I thought about this issue after hearing abouyt girls being given implant but no education for either gender on stds or emotional side of relationships so very wrong

Oh I agree - the assumption that women should gulp down hormonal contraceptives at the drop of a hat is awful, and I agree with lots of her points re PIV being much more of a risk for women. I'm not sure about the traumatic bonding thing - there are other possible causes (social and biological) for why women seem more likely to feel bonded to their male sexual partner after sex than vice versa.

I just think her argument is only part of the story (partly because I enjoy PIV myself, and am sure I'm not alone in that!).

But how often do you think PIV is carried out strictly for procreation these days? With condoms and the pill, couples can have it constantly with minimized risk for pregnancy. However, using the pill has A LOT of health risks.

It's odd that this post doesn't acknowledge PIV carried out for the purpose of procreation - it sees pregnancy as a horrid affliction involving puking and possible premature death. Now obviously unwanted pregnancy IS terrifying and pregnancy does carry risks, but it's only one side of the coin.

Are the two not interlinked lolly
It would be interesting to see what society would look like if the matriachal influence had been maintained rather than the need to know who was a true male heir

Sonic: Yes,and that's perfectly reasonable,but op seems to be coming from a philosophical rather than a physical standpoint.

Radfem has not been defined its boundaries move dependent onglobal mores as with anything
Until there is equality for all any organisation will cast ifrom those in control those who have the power and this way sucessive waves of fem have failed to make a significant impact on society

That said, there is no reason to give up something that only gives you pleasure.

There is no check list for being a radfem.

lollygag, I know you're joking, but...
There is alot of women who do not enjoy PIV. They might not find it pleasurable, or they might even find it painful for one reason or other. Their husband might demand it constantly and they feel obliged to do it. It's a pretty common problem actually. If PIV is giving you more problems than pleasure, you have the right to give it up even if you are in a het relationship. A man who loves you should - maybe not understand - but not want to harm the woman he loves.

Does being a RadFem mean that you can't like anything to do with males and PIV?

pretty much...to be a radfem, from my extensive reading of blogs and websites on the subject, you just need to be a bigot and prepared to ostracise yourself from the rest of society.

Stick to your RadFem principles and cut off any PIV sex.If he loves you he'll understand.

Does being a RadFem mean that you can't like anything to do with males and PIV?

No. However if you aware of radfem analysis you might not find sex and relationships with males under patriarchy as unproblematic anymore. That blogger points out all the things that are dangerous and problematic about constant/compulsory PIV as standard for het sex, and I think it's very important. Never see anyone talk about that anywhere else. More here: factcheckme.wordpress.com/category/piv/

There's no official definition that I know of...

Anyone who says "I am an X" without clarification should expect at least 20% of the people listening to think that they said something that they didn't. (depending on the audience, of course)

PIV is Penis in Vagina. Also there was a quote from Tom Gunn, who decided to remain celebate rather than risk his life with anal sex during the AIDS epidemic in America in the 80s. I think that actually puts it into perspective.

However, no one is saying that RadFem's are bitter, dried up old hags and lesbians who need a real good screwing to 'fix' them (well except MRAs and lefty doods who love their pornified 'liberal' society. No PIV is just an alternative viewpoint.

what is PIV?

To say that any man who engages in consensual sex with a woman is a potential risk is ludicrous. It is also essentially saying that i can't be a feminist if i also enjoy sex with a man.

or am i missing something?

No of course not but this from that link does sum it up for me because I too have had this experience (along with the same lightbulb moment).

"Collective trauma bonding: YES. I found myself at work the other day in a distressed state and when one of my older, more senior male colleagues spoke soothingly to me and asked ?is there anything I can do to make things easier for you?? I felt an inexplicable sexual tenderness toward him. I wanted to curl into his protection and despite the fact that I had never had a sexual feeling for him before (in fact the very idea horrifies me) this feeling was inextricable from sexual connection. The sexual bonding happened specifically because of my distressed state and was triggered by him speaking soothingly and offering to alleviate my suffering. I couldn?t make sense of this til now, but these posts have clarified it for me. I am trauma bonded to men as a group because of patriarchy and my own experiences of hetero relationships and PIV."

My bold. Just because you have a trusting relationship with a man doesn't mean that you can't be RadFem - Andrea Dworkin had a trusting relationship with her second husband but her first was abusive to her and she also spent time in Holland as a prostitute.

We had a thread about this same blog post before I think. I will see if I can find it.