Attitudes to sex: is it maybe a cultural thing?

Jericho we're arguing the same point.

There is misogyny and misogyny though isn't there.

We're talking about a country where misogyny is enshrined in law.

yellow, saying that sex harms women is like saying that if I take a big stick and go around hitting people, it must be because wood harms people and we should cut down all the trees.

Well there are few countries that aren't misogynistic to some degree.
You may as well ask why is no one questioning you why didn't you start a global revolution.
Whereas it's a personal choice (that word again!) whether to go to an ldc or not, for example. Scale, I suppose

Sex can harm women, as you made clear with your anal prolapse.

I know why it is A no-no. Not why it is THE no-no.

There are other issues. It is not all about sex.

My point, Jericho, was that by going to Saudi Arabia, I was supporting, however tenuously, their regime. I didn't HAVE to go, no-one made me.

I don't know where you got that I was criticising women who lived there, but I'm more than happy to just leave that analogy, which, as I've explained, wasn't specifically about Saudi but about how sex seems to be jumped on every 5 minutes while other issues are frequently ignored or at least not as controversial.

Sinical - I'm curious. You say that 'choice feminism' seems 'very rightwing' - is there a suggestion that this is incompatible with feminist views? Surely being a feminist doesn't automatically make you a left-winger? Or does it?

(Realise this is a bit off-topic, am not derailing. Just interested as this is something I mull over often.)

For me feminism is about ending male supremacy and liberating women from male dominance.

But yellow, you said sex 'isn't the only thing that harms women'. And I'm saying, sex doesn't harm women at all. Sex is great. But misogyny does harm women.

Yellowraincoat the sexual exploitation of women at the hands of men, is considered a big no-no because it is extreme violence against women.

Because it is the real life manifestation of women's lower status within society.

Because it is sexual, gendered violence against women that is tolerated by society at large.

All three of the above are fundamentally misogynistic and contrary to the basic tenets of feminism.

Sexual issues are always going to be big issues because they are areas of extreme violence against women.

I'm saying, I don't get what your Saudi Arabia analogy is doing. Misogynistic cultures and microcultures exist all over the place - porn exists in a misogynistic culture; Saudi Arabia has a misogynistic culture. That doesn't mean women who live in Saudi Arabia are to be judged or criticised - surely the reverse?

Jericho, I know that sex and misogyny are different, but I think you've totally missed my point.

That's not my point, SinicalSanta. My point was why are women daily derided on here for being unconcerned/not having the right opinion about stripping but I've never been so much as questioned about why I lived in Saudi?

I could have done something very practical: not lived there. But I didn't. And no-one (except myself) has ever questioned that choice.

I'm not trying to make this all about me and Saudi Arabia - it's just an example. No-one gets shouted down like women who support stripping/porn/whatever. And I really think that's a sad situation.

There are a million things that we do every day that are harmful to women somewhere and I'm sure most of us are guilty of having performed some of those actions.

Choice feminism says, this is the world, make it work for you, and if it doesn't work out, well that's your choice. Seems very rightwing, ifyswim.

yellow - sex doesn't harm women. Misogyny harms women. They are different.

Presumably you lived in Saudi Arabia for some particular reason, yrc - work, maybe? Or did you sit down with a map of the world and a big pile of money and think "right, I can live anywhere I want, so where shall I choose to go? What regime shall I choose to support?". Surely not!

Anyway, I agree with beachcomber that a return to the label 'women's liberation' clarifies what feminism is about. It certainly isn't about supporting whatever choice a woman makes just because she's a woman as WW seems to imply. Not if that choice perpetuates the systematic oppression of women. Surely what we can all support is the idea of liberating women from oppression so that we have real, decent options to choose from.

To me, choice feminism is a bit too narrow in scope.

It may benefit me to do zxy, but not women in general.

I don't think porm etc are THE big no-no's.
But it's culturally accepted in a way that the lack of women's rights in Saudi isn't.

That in itself invites debate. There's no debate against those who think SA is all fine and dandy - they're just knobs.

Also what can I practically do about women's rights in Saudi?
but I can campaign against a lapdancing club opening in my town.

If feminist is about liberating women so they can make their own choices, then it doesn't make sense to say that they can't make that choice and be a feminist.

That's not what feminism means to me, because some people's choices have an adverse impact on women-as-a-group's opportunities and treatment, including theirs. What you've described is choice feminism

I really don't get your point, Jericho. Is sex the only thing that harms women?

Saudi Arabia also promotes a culture of misogyny. Or are you just going on the attack? Because I was sort of hoping that we were managing to avoid that on this thread.

I think porn and stripping and prostitution are big no-nos because they harm women and promote a culture of misogyny.

It's not quite the same as living in Saudi Arabia, unless you are trying to tell us you required medical attention for your STDs and anal prolapse as a result of moving there?

I just don't get why porn and stripping and prostitution are the big no-nos. I lived in Saudi Arabia, I went there by choice, and to me, that's pretty much a bad thing for a feminist to do because of how badly they treat women.

I have never once had a feminist tell me I wasn't a feminist for having lived there though. And that was something I did on a very practical level, spending and making money in a country where women are oppressed daily so I was basically supporting that. It wasn't just me saying "I don't care about porn", a viewpoint that, on a practical level, has probably zero effect.

I wouldn't like to see that label returned because I think one of the most difficult messages to convey about feminism is that it benefits men and women, just as the patriarchy harms men as well as women.

In-fighting within any political movement weakens the cause, but it is no different to any other because by its nature, politics involves people coming to it with their individual thoughts and ideas.

One of the biggest myths about feminism though is that to be anti-porn is to be anti-sex and from this flawed equation there are numerous counter-attacks from people who defend porn i.e its opponents are prudes, old-fashioned, sexually repressed etc. I've seen a lot of that on threads over the past week or so and not just on the feminism board, as well as a kind of myopic inability to separate the personal from the political.

I don't recognize the OP's description of British attitudes to sex in my own (British) social circle - but then that's not surprising since it is a big generalization to make.

I was thinking about this term 'prude' and maybe I can say something here that didn't fit on the other thread.

We were talking about a practice which is mostly for the sexual pleasure of the bloke who's involved. In itself, that doesn't make it suspect from a feminist POV (I think), and of course, there's nothing wrong with being sexually aroused or emotionally satisfied with your partner's enjoyment.

But I didn't really get why people were making out that, if women don't enjoy this sex act, they must be 'sad' or prudes or not enjoy sex. I mean ... it's not controversial, surely, to say that getting pleasure out of someone else's orgasm may not be the most exciting and fulfilling sexual practice on the spectrum?

I don't know if this makes any sense ... but to me, if I heard a group of women talking about some sexual practice that is primarily about women's pleasure, and saying it was dirty or horrible, I would be really sad. And if I read a woman posting (as people not infrequently do) to say she was struggling to enjoy sex for some reason, I'd be sad about that too and I would do my best to respond with helpful advice.

If someone said they didn't really fancy a sex act that was primarily about the man's pleasure ... I'd just say well, don't bother then. You do what you like, you find a partner who likes it too, and that's fine.

I find it really sad that 'enjoying sex' seems to be being defined as 'enjoying your man having really good sex'.