"Intercourse/PIV is always rape, plain and simple."

YY to your reinforced point, Buffy, that "sex" is supposed to mean PIV and the other stuff isn't proper sex.

It's bizarre. Highly convenient for men people who didn't really cheat as they didn't have "sex", I notice. But the underlying cultural reason's got to be the tradition of ownership - any PIV might lead to pregnancy and the body of a man's wife was his vehicle for reproduction. So he owned the rights to ejaculate in her body.

Considering the short space of time we've been free of those conditions, it's inevitable that they still underlie our thoughts & expectations. Generally speaking.

"The old fashioned solution is no sex outside marriage. The current position seems to be women bear the brunt of the risk and stigma. What's the alternative to those two?"

1. Having no sex or just masturbating yourself which in fact is the choice of many more women than most realise.

1. Doing all the sexual things there are except the penetration and yes lots of people do that too but I won't be writing on here about the huge complexity of sexual things many of us do as I keep that private.

1. Sex with other women.

The writer is a moron, who thinks that sex for anybody not a virgin is painful, for reasons of, and I quote, STDs, swelling, bruising, urinary and vaginal infections.....god, somebody save me from these ....

Look, sex is not painful unless you are a virgin - the reason why sex is painful the first time is because our predecessors didn't want men just overpowering women and women going "ok, what the hell" - evolution favoured women who felt pain during sex (at least the first time) so that they could be much more picky about their sexual partners, just to make sure that they got the right one.

Non-consensual sex is wrong for other reasons, not just because of any associated genital pain. And you should be ashamed of yourself for perpetuating a dumb post, and the author of the post should be five times as ashamed for perpetuating a position that they themselves know is erroneous. Sex isn't painful, or harmful to anybody. And if you want to tally up pain levels, childbirth is a hundred times more painful than first sex, so...I guess we should blame children, or nature for being patriarchal and repressive and sexist too.

What's the alternative to those two?

In Garlic Utopia (which probably smells a bit) every sexual encounter is a meeting of equals, sharing responsibility for any risk and equally interested in their own & one another's enjoyment. Long-term sexual relationships change as the participants, and their relationship dynamics, change.

Given that this does actually happen quite a lot, I'm loath to write off all PIV as abusive or, at best, subject to repressed feelings of victimisation. It's an insult to all the happy folks engaging in mutually beneficial PIV!

But, clearly, the generalised cultural message is still that men 'do it to' women. And women are - overall and in popular culture - supposed to be sluts or gatekeepers or both at once, shouldering the responsibility for men's sexual selfishness as well as all the risks.

This is of course fundamental & needs discussing, possibly for ever. While throwing out the bathwater of cultural mores, tropes and moral prisons, I'd prefer not to throw out the baby of equal & enjoyable relationships!

Garlick your post at 18.10 makes perfect sense to me. Particularly this.

My discomfort with today's posts here, as with the Dworkin excerpt, is that a definitive view seems to be emerging - clitoral-only orgasms are always best; PIV is invasion; women are always 'done to' in sex - that's just as unhelpful as the view being queried.

I'm really not sure why a quote from Dworkin should be presented as any more persuasive than what you have said.

Here's the consultation thread BR:

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/2519183-proposed-legislation-in-scotland-licensed-saunas-and-legalised-prostitution

"I'm surprised none of the real feminists on here who live in the UK appear to have no interest in responding to a live consultation being promulgated to change the law in part of the UK."

What's a "real feminist"? I couldn't find the tread you are talking about, by the way, but I have been very vocal in the past on the subject of prostitution, so I feel pretty comfortable in the face of this particulR bit of whataboutery.

she actually cares about you, unlike the wishy-washy lazy feminists on here!

Lass, I've responded to every survey and petition request regarding 'legalised prostitution'. I think that counts as contributing. Since I've formed clear views on the matter, I feel there's not much to be gained by discussing it over & over again with people who have also formed clear views.

.I am not from Scotland, cannot influence Scottish politics, and therefore, it doesn't really matter what I think.

If you are in the UK what you think about this is as relevant as what I think. I don't see any requirement that one must be in Scotland to respond to this consultation. If the law changed in Scotland that will have an effect on the rest of the UK. Yes, you did comment on the thread. I would encourage you to respond to the consultation too.

Oh, and Lass, if you are so worried about prostitution, maybe you should give witchwind another chance. Seems this vile extremist is also opposed to prostitution: witchwind.wordpress.com/2014/03/12/cutting-through-the-throes-of-intersectionality-part-ii-on-the-structure-of-mens-interlocking-chains/

So, she actually cares about you, unlike the wishy-washy lazy feminists on here!

Lass, as that thread is being trolled by a PBP, you have no idea if posters have responded to the consultation but not the thread.

In any event, why not say "hey, could you all take a look at this thread, it's important" ?

Why do you feel uncomfortable with that? Is your enjoyment of PiV so fragile that it cricitism will break it?

I don't know. I wouldn't say it's fragile - mind you, it might have degraded a bit during its lengthy retirement! I'll find out next time I need it

I'm not particularly reassured by your agreement, FW. I agree, though, that the physical & emotional aspects of sex can't be usefully separated - and would include social aspects with that, too. Hence this discussion, I guess.

I know we swim in a murky sea of patriarchal porn, VV, but am quite fond of imagining 'feminist utopia' as it guides me on which battles to pick. I would say that at least one such utopia has been proposed here: it made PIV illegal and everyone had hand & mouth sex instead of employing both sets of genitals at once. That's a very, very long way from my ideal.

Oh dear Virgin Yes. I contributed . I think I even started a thread about it the last time this issue was raised in Scotland.

I'm surprised none of the real feminists on here who live in the UK appear to have no interest in responding to a live consultation being promulgated to change the law in part of the UK.

Lass, you are very keen to tell feminists what they think! I for one have only not commented on the Scottish brothels thread because I hadn't noticed it. I think it's perfectly possible, isn't it? to be interested in both the academic and the practical side of an issue? And actually, there aren't mNy posters on this thread at all- just the usual navel gazing suspects who, to judge everyone by my standards, enjoy theoretical discussion and abstract ideas- and would bring the same approach to anything.

And I don't think liking cunnilingus is a requirement for being a feminist, is it? I hope not- I only like it occasionally if I'm in the right mood.

I am always interested when women say they say they aren't feminists. Which bits don't you agree with?

Have you no opinions on the possibility that in part of the UK it might be possible for men to buy women (and presumably also young men) to wank into or over with no shame or repercussions?

See, you are not a feminist. If you were, you'd know that this topic has been discussed to death. Have you ever considered that, maybe, everyone has already formed an opinion on this and don't want to discuss it anymore?

I gave it a try, but am already fed up with talking to the pro-prostitution lobby. There is no use in talking about it. I am not from Scotland, cannot influence Scottish politics, and therefore, it doesn't really matter what I think.

Also, if you don't think feminism has any relevance for you, why don't you go and celebrate that women are treated as sex objects? If you reject feminism, you submit to patriarchal notions of what you should be, i.e. a sex object.

Don't complain about feminists not protecting you from oppression while you sit there and twiddle your thumbs and enjoy your PiV.

Garlick - I am agreeing with your post. There is a lot in there to think about. One point I pick up is your acknowledgement of the complex relationship between the physical and the emotional aspects of sex.

Given the arguments I have had on the thread it sounds trite to say I am sorry you were raped but I am genuinely sorry. Its something I haven't experienced but I know and as you explained it isn't sex..

I read the article and thought it was offensive, extremist nonsense. I see the original responses were very critical of it (and of the OP for posting it as several as posts were questioning her motives).

The discussion seems to have moved on to the point that no-one questions that an individual woman can consent but , if one considers women as a class, there is chin scratching that maybe the writer has a point. The point being that women are so conditioned to accept heterosexual intercourse as the norm that whilst individual women may consent , as a class they can't and/or why is heterosexual intercourse accepted as the norm?

Many of you have mentioned other activities ; there are a few posts referring to other activities which are not just alternatives but are stated to be better and more pleasurable for women- not qualified as being better for the poster concerned, but better for all.

I am only sexualy attracted to men. I'm not interested in digital stimulation (frankly I'm always going to be better at that than any man - if that's what I want I'll do it myself) Cunnilingus is a huge turn off for me. I hate it. No doubt, not being a feminist, I've never properly thought about why this should be. If I weren't so brainwashed I would realise how wrong I am. To that extent I agree with Freeworker. I dislike intensely the idea that women are eternally oppressed.

And as for that Dworkin quote- you can feministplain as much as you like but I will not take that as anything more than applicable to her own troubled self.

What I find odd is there is a thread about the fact a dangerously misguided female Scottish MSP is pushing for pimping and brothel keeping to be legal in Scotland.
It has a tenth of the traffic of this thread.

Maybe you think it's just a domestic Scottish matter . It isn't. Many of you live in the UK. Have you no opinions on the possibility that in part of the UK it might be possible for men to buy women (and presumably also young men) to wank into or over with no shame or repercussions? Imagine the re-marketing opportunities for Gretna Green. The Old Smithy can be the New Knocking Shop

Does this type of discussion put people off feminism? Well it's fascinating to read. I will no doubt be told my opinion doesn't count, (being of the female sex but not a feminist) but the lack of interest in the "let's allow brothels in Scotland " as opposed to the huge interest in attempting to find a shred of sense in that article certainly gives me no incentive to think feminism has any relevance for me.

I've been wanting to say I think this has arisen from the very socialisation under examination: it's as if posters can only envisage PIV as a bloke forcing/penetrating/breaking into a woman. That vision is patriarchal porn.

It is also the reality in which women live. We cannot just pretend to live in a feminist utopia. We have to work with what is there. And what is there is that men rape and coerce women frequently. Men who are selfish in bed are commonplace.

What is there is a very strong pressure to have PiV, with clitoral orgasms being considered "foreplay" at best.

On the other hand, men are not expected to even try out penetration to see if they like it.

Therefore, I really do not get why you see a problem with a view of clitoral orgasm as always best emerging (which I don't think is happening, all or most people here wrote they don't agree with the blog post by witchwind) in this tiny thread in the whole big internet that is full of PiV-porn. Why do you feel uncomfortable with that? Is your enjoyment of PiV so fragile that it cricitism will break it?

The Dworkin passage makes me uncomfortable.

In my perception and most of my adult experience, both man and woman are similarly vulnerable. I don't feel I'm being penetrated or invaded (I certainly did while being raped.) My role, to me, is not submissive. I find penetrative sex far more satisfying than the other sorts.

I'm fully aware that the majority of women don't feel like this - and also that I'm by no means unique. I can't speak for all the others; in my case, it's a combination of biology - my body likes PIV - and some very deliberate reconstruction of my ideas around sex, which was my response to the dissonance between what my body likes and the social messages I was receiving about submission & gatekeeping.

I'm aware, too, of course, that women risk more in sex with men. Both partners can't be equally vulnerable in that respect. They can, though, share equal concern & responsibility for her welfare.

My discomfort with today's posts here, as with the Dworkin excerpt, is that a definitive view seems to be emerging - clitoral-only orgasms are always best; PIV is invasion; women are always 'done to' in sex - that's just as unhelpful as the view being queried.

I've been wanting to say I think this has arisen from the very socialisation under examination: it's as if posters can only envisage PIV as a bloke forcing/penetrating/breaking into a woman. That vision is patriarchal porn.

None of my efforts to say this are proving effective. I'm just stumbling along, hoping to get something across in the end ...

SoftDrifted - Dworkin's description of the physical process as experienced by a woman is what many women enjoy. Possibly not Dworkin, possibly not you. If the woman consents and the man consents then yes that is the biological fact but its up to the couple in question to agree that and if they do there is absolutely nothing biological, social, legal or ethically wrong with it.

Sorry, link fail

cartoon

Frame 5 in particular freeworker1

[[http://www.robot-hugs.com/but-men/]]
Frame 5 in particular

I don't think FW is a GF, buffy. He's very impolite, though.