not sure what to title this but it's to do with ejaculation

[YuleingFanjo]

and in particular a man ejaculating on a woman's face. Sorry - I feel awful writing it down.

I was talking to a friend last night, she is much nore sexually adventurous than I am and she was saying that she thought it was part of normal sexual behaviour, that most men found it a turn on and most people she knew thought it was normal.

I argued that it was something that came from porn, was not what I would call normal and there was no equivilant sexual 'thing' for a woman to do to a man. She said that women can 'gush' (I have never done this, maybe I am abnormal) or piss or poo (!) which I pointed out was a totally different thing. But is it?

I was trying to discuss it with her and point out that her sexual encounters are out of the norm, definitely aren't encounters within a loving relationship, and that ejaculating in someones's face is surely more about disrespect than anything else?

or am I wrong. I just find it really horrible and if anyone asked me to let them do so I would show them the door.

Soory - I hope I don't sound like some hairy trucker trying to get off on the whole thing, and I am not asking for personal experiences (I would prefer not to read them thanks) but more to discuss if I am right about the power/porn/disrespect thing...

I canvassed four different women on this today. Close friends, btw - I didn't just randomly start asking people at work what they thought about men spunking on them from a feminist perspective

One friend thought it was gross and demeaning, and had never done it or had a man suggest it to her. She thought it must be something perpetuated as enjoyable / aceptable by porn. She couldnt imagine any other reason for it. She is a born again Christian, though, so perhaps we can discount her .

One friend had dabbled with it in her younger days, but has never done it with her husband, with whom she has a good sex life and relationship generally. In retrospect, feels she was coerced in to it and didn't actually want to do it or enjoy it. She felt very strongly that it this is something porn has made acceptable, when in reality she can't imagine many women enjoying it. She was aghast at the idea that any decent man would do this - and she ain't a prude, this friend. That was interesting for me.

The other two have been 'round the block' like my good self (in a former, younger life) and thought it was a totally normal, almost vanilla thing to do. However, they did also agree that it 'comes from porn' and felt that a lot of men want to do it because they have seen it in porn and think it is one of those 'dirty little tricks you can tick off and say you have done'. Very juvenile, if that's true.

3/4 regularly have oral sex in a female-dominant position (use imagination!), so I think what goes on in people's private lives is generally a lot more than lie-back-and-think-of-England.

None of them watch porn - 2 of them have watched it with a man. None of them find most porn a turn on, although one of my friends is bisexual and says she has seen lesbian porn that was 'beautifully done', whatever that means.

Anyhoo, thought that might be of interest.

YuleingFango.

Thanks for this thread - it has made me think (and not about jizz).

I think it is a shame that there are so many posters who seem to conflate 'but I like it ' with 'but I'm a feminist' and think the two have anything much to do with each other.

'twas ever thus. Big obstacle for feminism/women's liberation though unfortunately.

I say this, you understand, because this is a supposed feminist discussion board and therefore the sort of place where such things should be said.

I still struggle with this whole concept of sexual likes conditioned by the patriarchy. To me it sounds like the presumption is that it's a male thing to like sex, whilst women are only conditioned to do it (or like it) - that simply doesn't make sense to me.

And yes, of course, sex can also be a dominance tool - the approach that it first and foremost is one seems reductionist to me.

Gosh, giant leaps there WidowWoman.

I'm not saying that women don't like sex .

I would imagine that most of us do - we have g spots and clitorises which are immensely pleasurable zones (plus a whole bunch of other areas that feel good) after all.

I'm saying patriarchy does not accord us neutral space in which to be sexual.

That we are sexual, goes without saying.

If you think about it, feminism is advocating liberty, not repression. But many think otherwise.

Actually I find it very repressive to be told that I'm a prude or claiming women don't like sex just because I analyse/find wanting how women are socialized to be sexual by male supremacy.

As I said earlier on this thread;

"Being liberated is not embracing what you are being socialized to do. It is having the freedom to explore what you really want to do."

Seriously? You think women who prefer something else to having a man come on their face, don't like sex?

I would suggest, gently, if someone else orgasming over you is the peak of your sex life, sister woman, you're doing it wrong.

I find this really difficult. because we keep being told the personal is political. Yet there is never any space for us to give our personal account without being told by other feminists (and I am a feminist!) that our own personal experiences don't count. I find it quite extraordinary! There is no other 'cause of the oppressed' where this is the case.

TBE - I don't find anything wrong per se with finding dominance or submission arousing in a sexual roleplay context - and don't think it neccessarily hurts anyone - (and yes, I've read that link which says BDSM is corny and stupid, but think it's completely missing the point) - dominance/domineering outside that context, and when the person in the submissive position is not there by choice but coercion is a different problem.

The idea that society can get rid of people striving for dominance (by which I don't mean male dominance over women, but some people's dominance over other people) is - in my view - naive. Humans are social animals after all.

I think the imbalance which needs to be addressed is that men in most situations are advantaged simply by being men regardless of individual skills and capability.

beachcomber what would a neutral space in which to be sexual be? I guess you don't mean beige bedding and wallpaper

Do you know what? I really, really like a little bit of S&M. I like being, by turns, submissive during sex (jizz on face etc etc) and dominant (vice versa and more...).

Not because I am oppressed, but because I am so in control of my own life that, actually, I quite like my entertainment to involve complete obliviion - just lying back and being pleasured and, yes, a little bit voyeuristic.

Who can tell me that that is wrong? Or not 'feminist"? Bollocks.

Shoopaloop the whole 'personal is political' thing poses me a whole bunch of problems.

Firstly, I don't always walk the walk even if I talk the talk (perso).

Secondly, women do what they have to to survive in the patriarchy.

Thirdly, I won't let either of the above stop me from analysing the whole deal. (political).

Sorry WidowWadman to have typed your name incorrectly above.

I dunno what a neutral space would be like. I just know that it sure 'ain't patriarchy.

jericho - fwiw - cum in my face doesn't really do much for me - but that doesn't mean that those who find it great do something wrong. Who are you to judge what is a legitimate turn on and what isn't?

So what please is the unpatriarchal/oppression free/neutral zone sex without any political problems?

So far I've read BDSM is problematic, face-jizzing is problematic, anal is problematic, vaginal is problematic, the only thing I haven't heard yet which kind of sex isn't problematic from a political point of view.

beachcomber - so basically you're just shouting "down with this sort of thing" but don't actually have any idea what you would like to replace it with?

What an odd kind of revolution.

Beachcomber, I agree with all of what you have said, and I am with you!

I find sex the hardest area to broach, though. it is always problematic for me, especially when discussing it with other feminists.

I can analyse the porn industry from a feminist POV until the cows come home (and I wholeheartedly believe that the porn industry is vile and damaging to women), but when it comes to my own sexual desires and sex life as is, I struggle.

I see myself as on the radical end of the liberal feminist spectrum. I am not one of these who thinks that Jordan getting her tits out empowers women, honestly.

But I do like 'deviant' sex, for want of a better word. I don't really understand how we can take 'power' out of sex. It is absolutely part of it, for me. Which is problematic for a feminist. And I would like to discuss that priblem, rather than be told I am a shit feminist, iyswim?

Nope.

I'm engaging in feminist analysis. (And of a kind which has been around for ages and can be easily accessed by reading a bit, be it feminist internet spaces or written works. There are quite a lot of women who have given up substantial time and brain space to these issues - they are worth reading IMO).

And I'm not shouting either.

A leetle finesse is what we need now for this discussion to be of value. Otherwise it will just be adversarial, and I don't really dig that kind of discussion between women.

..oh and I am not ignorant of feminist theory. My mum is a feminist academic

"I don't really dig that kind of discussion between women."

I for one don't give a fig whether someone I'm discussing with is man or woman. And since I've not gone at hominem but am still discussing at rem I think that's not really warranted.

Personally to me the kind of feminist analysis which has been outlined on this thread over and over again doesn't read very objective to me. And without any counterproposal, not very useful either.

Oh and WidowWadman - the reason you will find that most feminists will happily admit that they don't know what things will be like, should patriarchy ever end, is testament to patriarchy's force, pervasion and insidious nature.

A real force to be reckoned with, and not underestimated, if you like.

Snarking about women being honest enough to explore the notion that they find it difficult to see beyond patriarchy (but not for lack of wanting), is hardly progressive.

Quite the opposite.

I hadn't been snarky. I was asking questions. But it seems that it's only ok to question the patriarchy, but not feminist ideas ever.

Anyway, I think it's time for me to disengage from this discussion. It has come to the point where it gets as enlightening as discussing measles with an antivaxxer or avogadro's number with a homeopath. Shame really.

Widow - why should sex be unproblematic? Being aware that there's a debate to be had about relations between men and women, and that heterosexual sex is part of that, doesn't stop anyone from having good sex, does it?

And WidowWadmen - I have to ask.

Have you been around feminist discussions in a way that has let you know that accusing a woman of shouting/being illogical, just because you don't agree with her, is a bit shoddy/intellectually lazy/clichéd/boorish/silencing/bullying/adversarial/rude?

Genuine question.

WidowWadman, don't go. Are you a feminist? If so, stay!

I think its really important to listen to all feminist voices.

beachcomber - have you ever stopped to think about whether the statement "this is a silencing term" not actually is a silencing term?

I wouldn't call anyone illogical just because they disagree with me. I have even said "I don't agree with you, but can see where you're coming from/follow your logic" a few times in recent discussions on this board.

But calling something which is illogical, illogical, is not intellectually lazy or cliched. But just pointing out that there's a breakdown in logic. It's nothing personal.

I suspect that everyone struggles with the political vs the personal to an extent. Eroticism and why we find things erotic can be difficult to explain even to ourselves, because our sexual responses feel involuntary. I think it's worth questioning ourselves though - and our partners, even if it's as basic as 'Does this actually arouse me or is it something I think should turn me on? If it's the latter, where does that expectation come from?'

For me, it is problematical if a man or woman feels constrained by the boxes they are strait-jacketed into by society, because this is often the enemy of individual sexual expression. Which is why it is hugely ironic that people continue to conflate feminism with a desire to repress human sexuality.

Any length of time spent on the Relationships board tends to open your eyes to this. We see posts all the time from women who are partnered with lazy men and wonder where their sex drive has gone, or from women in sexless relationships complaining that they feel 'less womanly' because their husband doesn't want sex (because men want sex all the time, right?) or from women who have desperately tried to be 'cool' about their partners' use of porn, for fear of appearing oppressive or jealous.

That doesn't sound to me like freedom to be a sexual being.....