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

[TheFeministsWife]

I would class myself as a Radical Feminist, (but now I'm starting to think I may have been deceiving myself). But after reading this blog post now I'm not so sure.

I'm married and have been for a long time. I like PIV, I love my DH I don't think I'm trauma bonded to him. He's never forced me into sex, or made me feel guilty if I don't want it. I enjoy it, I like the intimacy and also the orgasms of course.

I don't want to ridicule what the blogger has said, (I read a lot of her blog posts and like them) but I'm struggling with this one. Am I fooling myself to think I can be a RadFem and in a happy het relationship? I've commented on the blog a few times (under Angela) but still can't fathom the whole thing. One commenter has said PIV is unnatural. I thought basic biology would prove it was the most natural thing in the world. And another commenter has said things won't be safe until all females live in colonies like we used to.

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

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 .

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 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...

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?

Sorry cross posted with sunshineandbooks

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.

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.

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.

I think that at least when it comes to sex education, more emphasis should be put on non-penetrative sex in order to combat unwanted pregnancies etc. At the moment, in most media and in schools, use of condoms seems to be the 'responsible' angle when teaching young people about sexual safety. This puts girls at risk not only of physical disatisfaction, but also through their experiences they may become accustomed to male pleasure being more important than female pleasure.

In some publications aimed at young men I've seen oral and anal sex advocated to prevent pregnancy (not oral from boy to girl, mind). There needs to be a change from such a focus on the penis and 'losing one's virginity' should surely not still mean piv. Are all lesbians virgins in that case?

Young women, and men, would be sexually and emotionally empowered and liberated if they were not taught simply to 'remember to use a condom'. PIV should be presented as one of many sexual experiences, but the risks involved for the person being penetrated must be conveyed.

When I say lesbian in that context, I meant a woman who had only had sex with women. Just to clarify.

I don't think any of the radfems in that article said that sex (PIV) isn't pleasurable did they...
If you go there, you're definitely missing the point.

What they're asking is.. is it worth it ?

For women, that is.

Of course it's worth it for men! There's zero risk of pregnancy for them!

But when there's a risk of pregnancy for the woman, you have to ask yourself why so many men are doing PIV. If I knew that sticking my finger in someone's ear might cause them to have an (unwanted) blood clot in the nose that would need to be removed via an operation, I would think long and hard before sticking my bloody finger in someone's ear.
Men, though, don't think sticking their dicks into women is a problem at all. Which really makes you wonder how women are seen in men's eyes.... FOr them, the pleasure is always worth it insofar as (STDs aside), they're not going to experience any painful side effects.

No contraception is 100% effective. The pill has horrible side effects (thrombosis, blood clots, cancer) .
Abortions come with risk of hemorrhage. Pregnancy comes with risk of death (don'T believe me, check out the maternal mortality rates. The US has one of the highest maternal mortality rates in the world after Kenya, because of its obsession with C-sections)

Basil, "modern medicine" caused a lot of deaths for women. The men who pushed the midwives didn't even know that you were supposed to wash your hands!! So "doctors" would go straight from cutting up a corpse to delivering a baby. Hundreds of women died from infection this way. And all the while these doctors of "modern medicine" were claiming that they were better at helping women than those "dirty midwives." They invented all sorts of unecessary and humiliating procedures, such as the lithotomy position, which hindered birth and caused many deaths.

ETA: the men who pushed the midwives out , that was

I spent a happy couple of hours reading the Radfem blogs.

Very interesting reading. A lot more strident views than on here, but definitely thought provoking.

I thought the comments policy was interesting, and you'd be a brave man to post. (or trans) but I didn't quite get what :

'carnivorous and necrophiliac behaviors of men' was?

Any clues?

Well, your quote has no context.
But I have seen discussions of what Mary Daly calls Biophilia (love of life) vs necrophilia (love of death.) So a culture that promotes violence, war and domination over others can be called necrophilic in this way of thinking.

Yes point taken Sakura but by modern medicine, I mean post war - IE when doctors did know they had to wash hands etc.

I'm referring to pre-industrial society when talking about high mortality rates. Even when midwives were in charge rather than doctors, giving birth was an immensely dangerous undertaking.

I'm not saying what we've got is anywhere near satisfactory atm btw - the death rate is still too high and many women's birth experiences are horrific thanks to the conveyor belt approach to labour.

What. The. Actual. Fuck?

The feminist section on Mumsnet has really given me food for thought on many issues in the last few months, particualrly wrt to issues such as rape, the sex industry and women's place in society in general. I think that is fantastic.

However, the very fact that the above article is being given more than a second's thought before being discounted as a load of absolute baloney, makes me realise why most of Mumsnet steers well clear of this section.

The woman writing that article has major issues and is obviously incredibly pissed off she was born a woman. For me, feminism should be about celebrating women being women, and creating a place of equality for them alongside men, without putting down either sex. PIV is just biology, you cannot change the fact that men have a penis. Of course, PIV is not the be all and end all and a healthy relationship can consist of all different kinds of sex, but that is not what is being said here is it? She is saying that PIV is a terrible, dangerous act and that you are not a real feminist if you engage in it.

The horrible language and generalisations in that article tell me that the writer has had some horrible experiences and has obviously never been in a loving relationship which is very . However, to put across her thoughts as some sort of ideology (and for people on here to accept it), is just a whole load of crap and really does give 'feminism' a bad name.

Anyone who says "You are not a real feminist if..." and ends that sentence with anything other than "...you think men are better than women" or similar is automatically taken off my list of people whose opinions are worth listening to.

I rest my case.

Look if you think it's all crap and not worth discussing, that's your choice.

But there's no need to get aerated about the fact that other people are happy to shoot the breeze on this one and discuss it.

Sorry we can't just be kneejerk "this is all a load of baloney" for you. You have the option to take that POV but this is the feminist section and it's valid to discuss anything here from a feminist POV even if it's only to throw it out as not worth while. But we prefer to have more interesting discussions than just "this is crap" "yeah it really is" "oh man, that's such rubbish" "yeah, you're so right". That would be dull, no?

Why get so irritated that people want to discuss it?

FWIW I don't think anyone has said that they accept the premise of the article without question. But the thread has moved on from the original article and we're discussing related issues.

Your outrage is misplaced. It's OK to discuss things. In the rest of the world, we don't discuss stuff like this, so it's interesting to take what is not a generally promoted view and see what's what in it. If you don't find it interesting, I'm sure there are plenty of other threads which will interest you.

I find it preposterous that people discuss hideous winter boots in such detail wiht such a lot of links. But that's fine, I don't have to join in. I'm happy to leave them to it. One day, I might even click on one of those boots links myself (but if I do, take me out and shoot me because it will mean I have given up on life and joy).

Agree with your last paragragh sunshine.

"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."

PIV sex is the gold standard to which all other sexual experiences have to measure up and towards which all sexual encounters have to move. if you don't want it regularly you are a freak. As the MN relationship board points out regularly. And the fact that most sexual encounters are not intended to lead to pregnancy makes this even more absurd.