How has radical feminist critique of vaginal intercourse influenced you?

[femtastic]

Has radical feminist critique of vaginal intercourse had any impact on you?

Have any of you been so swayed by it that you've given up penetrative sex as a consequence?

Absolutely not that it is the only sex that counts. But that sex without penetration is a bit bleugh...

Sex without penetration is a bit bleurgh for you. And while I'm sure lots of people would agree with you, some wouldn't. Labelling their happy sex lives as "bleurgh" seems rather harsh. But then that is your modus operandi.

At a wild guess I would imagine that you think that lots of women who post on feminism are gay, and are calculating to upset with your "sex without a penis is bleurgh" approach.

Maybe not, but on past form I don't feel bad for hazarding that guess.

Not that people need a penis for penetration obv but still.

Why would I think they were gay?

Sad and unemancipated and in need of a good shrink, yes, perhaps!

Bonsoir why wouldn't you consider that some poeple may have a sex life that doesn't involve "the main event"

Surely some men who have problems still give pleasure to their partners. Some people may have difficulties because of illness, age or disability, should we assume they don't have and are not entitled to any sex life because sex "without penetration is a bit bleugh..."

I haven't said any of that, queenbathsheba. Re-read what I wrote.

LOL at sex without penetration beinga bit bleurgh.

Well yes it is if you're with a bleurgh lover.

Do you really t hink cunnilingus to orgasm without penetration immediately following is bleurgh? I have to say, I disagree there.

Penetration is most very definitely the main event! Bonsoir at
13:17:16

Bonsoir at 14:35:02 Absolutely not that it is the only sex that counts. But that sex without penetration is a bit bleugh...

I must admit I find it a bit odd that some of you will only ever have penetrative sex.

IS that because you do use hands, mouth etc. to stimulate to orgasm, but you don't really consider that real sex, or is it that you have penetrative sex every single time you kiss and cuddle and touch each other sexually, even if one or bot of you come via that sexual touching?

If the latter, I salute your energy.

We usually do 69 sometimes with, sometimes withourt penetration. Often going from one to another but mostly both of us finishing through oral. Nowt wrong with that we both enjoy it the most and as long as you are both getting some, who cares how you do it?

Also a man should always make a woman orgasm first everytime because thats just good manners and why we say ladies first

Hang on a minute! I prefer penetrative sex if it's good penetrative sex, which I assume Mal & Bonsoir mean, too. Doesn't mean I don't like any other forms of sex or would prefer bad PIV to good 'other' sex. Haven't seen any posters suggesting PIV is all that matters; am I reading a different thread?

I would have thought it obvious that good PIV sex would be instinctively preferable to most heterosexuals, seeing as it potentially fulfils the biological purpose as well as the fun one.

bullet234, if you meant that, I'm sorry to hear it. I hope you find ways to trust someone enough at some point :)

'I would have thought it obvious that good PIV sex would be instinctively preferable to most heterosexuals,'

Would say it depends on how good your oral technique is

I'm not keen on FP with fingers, My dp is a bit rough I've said a few times ,'you're not picking bluetack off the wall!'

each to their own, I need the 'main event'

True, I've never met anyone with good enough oral technique!

It's the latter for me HerBeggs

"Do you really think cunnilingus to orgasm without penetration immediately following is bleurgh"?

No, but I would call it hugely disappointing - if DH thought his work was done just by getting me to orgasm.

garlic anyone who says that sex without penetration is "bleurgh" isn't exactly adding much to the debate

Each to their own I say

Cunnilingus to orgasm is a poor substitute for good penetrative sex.

OK, PIV sex deserves its 'special' status as it is the type of sex that may lead to pregnancy, so it's understandable that somewhere deep down in most human beings' subconscious would be an awareness of this.
But sexual activity is about more than just generating a pregnancy. The vast majority of sexual encounters that occur (even between longterm married couples who want a massive family) are not going to start a pregnancy, nor is that the intention every single time.
But when you accept that PIV is not the only definition of 'sex' you do begin to see how narrow and heteronormative and male-orientated a lot of the language about sex actually is. The old how-many-times question only works if you are using a model that defines sex as PIV-leading-to-male-ejaculation. Bout the only interesting and useful thing I ever read in Sheila Jeffries' book on sex was a discussion of this and the information that for lesbian couples, it's sometimes more difficult to divide their sex life into 'times' they have sex ie if two women are in bed together, giving each other pleasure, if they stop from time to time for a cigarette, a wee or to fetch a glass of water, is there a kind of countdown after which the next sexual contact becomes 'another time'?

And while I agree that there is a difference between kissing someone and 'having sex' the line can get a bit blurred. It;s o good saying, it only counts as sex if everyone has an orgasm because plenty of PIV sex doesn't involve the woman having an orgasm, but it's stil counted as she;s been, well, Had Sex With.

I think its all up to different people we dont all like the same things, and we often like a big mix up of different things. One isnt better than the other and as long as both people in the couple have an orgasm every time and everyones satisfied then who cares how you do it?

I think you only have a problem if the women never/rarely orgasms because the man is selfish/only out for his own pleasure. Unfortunately there seems to be many women out there that fake it to not hurt his ego or are afraid to say what they want. I think it is important for all women to know that their sexual pleasure is just as important as the mans.

I think there are far too many women who believe that it is difficult to orgasm through penetrative sex and put up with lesser pleasures...

I can orgasm through both but I have a bit of an obsession with 69. I did it 6 days after birth cause I cant be without it Each to their own though

Actually, great sex doesn't even have to include orgasms, for either partner, we've often had some kind of sexual contact in a morning that's stopped just short of orgasms, it sort of sets you up for a day of teasing and the resulting full sex later on is amazing.

I agree Bonsoir, I was forty before I discovered the joys of blended orgasms, whilst they were originally brought on by oral and DH's talented fingers, I soon learned how to get them by being on top of him.

For me, I could give up oral, but I wouldn't want to forego penetrative sex, and I'm damn certain he wouldn't , it's usually the only way he can orgasm.

See that shows different strokes for different folks so to speak . I think its a shame that some people have had to wait until 40 for these things. I think that is why it is good that there is a lot more sexual information around waiting to be accessed and many women are more forceful at saying what they want. I still think there are a lot of women out there denied years of sexual pleasure unfortunately even in this day and age.

I disagree about cunnilingus not being nearly so satisfying. It dpeends - sometimes only a fuck will do, at other times, cunnilingus is much higher up the priority list. And sometimes, you want both.