Is it easier to be a feminist if you are a lesbian?

[PosieParker]

Or are there really men out there that hold feminist values dear too?

Last night my DH said he called someone at work a 'pussy', I nearly choked on my food, since when is such language okay? Whilst my DH can be quite laddish and very far from feminist values I was attracted to him because he's quite masculine. I often wonder whether a more progressive and less Neanderthal man would get my attention or whether I'd find him to emasculated?

saF, most bisexual people I've met are men. I was in love with one for a short time. A Russian. The most exciting man I've ever met in my life but a total narcissist, not that I think that had anything to do with him being bi.

But I know the porn idea you mean of two women snogging and can't be satisfied by each other and then the MAN comes along and satisfies them both with his 1 cock (as if )

I don'T agree with bisexual partners being more likely to cheat because of unfulfilled sexuality, because as I said I find monogamy extremely difficult, and I assumed that this was the norm for everyone. I am monogomous for moral reasons, because of the pain it would cause.
But reading nooka's post, I realise that other women can "do" monogamy better, or even naturally.

I've been faithful for 5 years now, and it's been a slog.

It might be chance though Sakura or the appeal of the familiar. dh had an affair which is why we separated - he said I should find someone else, but I really never felt the inclination, although the idea appealed (of having some fabulous man fall in love with me that is). But then I've rarely fancied men in any case (or women) I didn't really do crushes as a teenager, rarely get excited by film stars etc. Perhaps it's because I tend to get turned on by touch more than anything else (I have quite strong kinesthetic leanings), which isn't very casually available, especially as I'm not very comfortable with people I don't know very very well getting in my personal space.

nooka, yeah I agree with you about touch- and conversation. Obviously looks are important in the initial attraction but if there's no personality there it's an immediate turn-off to me. Then the more I like someone the more beautiful they become to me.
That doesn't seem to be the case for men, although that could be a stereotype of male sexuality. I'm not sure men are as "visual" as we're all supposed to believe they are. I believe in the beauty myth; that it's mostly marketing and that men in general do want other things in women apart from beauty.

I have never been interested in film stars either, never had posters on my wall. I didn't understand the concept. It's just an image (although I appreciate the aesthetic beauty of Johnny Depp). Never done crushes either, I'm far too pragmatic. I've never understood the point of pining for someone you can never have because they don't know you're alive(which is totally different to pining for an ex!)

saF, I'm still having trouble with the "political" lesbian concept. I understand why women wouldn't want a relationship with a man, but that's not a lesbian is it. That's just celibate. Unless they are attracted to women, in which case they are lesbian or bi.
And I don't understand why not being with men is political, because if we all did that there'd be no babies. So I don't understand it as a political move IYSWIM. Is intercourse the problem? I know Andrea Dworkin wrote a book called intercourse, which I haven't read. She was a lesbian married to a gay man so presumably never had intercourse.
BUt if you fancy men you can have relationship with them without having intercourse.

Interesting we both thought of Johnny Dep. It could be because he's not a traditionally patriarchy-made masculine character, but is in fact beautiful. Maybe women are just as visual as men and all the he-men we see on-screen are patriarchy's repressed homosexual fantasies

def homoerotic

In Asia though, men are more femininely "beautiful" (high cheekbones, smooth skin, slim build). You could say that caucasian women have more masculine traits, especially height, cheekbones, jawline, and black women and men are both more masculine looking again. It's not a coincidence that the majority of Olympic athletes are black and not Asian

i think it may make it easier to be a feminist without also being a hypocrite...

but then again, as pointed out alrady women can be mysognist too.

during the seventies the whole 'you can't be a feminist if you get married/ have kids' made the movemnt look rather ridiculos though - it made it look impractical, an idealism wishing to put itslf beyond attainability.

I agree EAP

did I imply black men were less attractive to women because they're more typically masculine? On the contrary! So I think our original hypothesis might be out the window sAF

sAF even with IVF there is still a shortage of sperm so it certainly wouldn't be an option for masses to do it.

I don't think there's a shortage of sperm, isn't there, like, millions in a man's cum.

THe problem with IVF is the lower than 20% success rate and the subsequent problems in pregnancy, PLacenta praevia is more common apparently because in intercourse the sperm is shot inside really powerfully, and the egg sticks in a more natural place in the womb

oh, and the problem of not knowing whether you're mating with someone blood related if there's a high incidence of ivf in a community

haha, no the sperm shoots into the womb
60 miles an hour or something

or is that a sneeze?

ANyway, it shoots higher up into the fallopian tubes sometimes so when the egg comes down it has already had the signal that it has been fertilized, and sticks in the right place, apparently.

Not sure exactly of the figures, but I did read that IVF pregnancies have more complications

ok the shooting thing sounds like rubbish when I read it back

But the lower than 20% success rate is def a fact

THe reason I'm not keen on the fertility industry is because it's almost entirely based on capitalist values