Good article about 'sex' (totally worksafe, don't panic)

[solidgoldbrass]

It's this one.

Sorry, I'm not sure i've made myself clear. I think that fisting is extreme no matter whether it's heteronormative or whether it really is popularly used in 'queer sex'. It is extreme because it is so violent and awful.

Fisting is popular among gay men, as well. And fisting among heterosexuals is not exclusively about the woman being the one penetrated.
It is, however, not something you should feel obliged to do if you don't like the idea. Whichever end of the fist your partner wants you to be on. Same goes for oral sex and even kissing: no sexual activity is compulsory.

And who is being fisted more often, who is more frequently represented in porn as being fisted, and who is coming under pressure from their partner to be fisted? Of course nothing is ever all one or the other. Just as I can well imagine there are some men around who, for example, do more that their fair share of housework whilst the woman they live with says it's men's work, but the exceptions don't negate the broader gendered problem.

That rapists and abusers force all kinds of activities on their victims doesn't make those activities wrong between consenting adults. Having gentle cunnilingus performed on you against your will is still disgusting and horrific even though it does you no physical harm.
I have often found, in feminist debates on sexual behaviour, that some people still want to make up a set of rules about which specific acts are permissible and which are wrong regardless of consent, and I don't think it's at all a good idea to insist to women who like a non-mainstream sexual practise that they must be being coerced.

That's not what I said nor what I see SGB.

Is there a possibility that there are women who like a man sticking a fist in her vagina? Yes possibly, I imagine that in a world of billions there are.

Is this the predominant experience of most women? I'd say not.

Does the porn industry represent it for those women who desire it? No I'd say not.

Does this representation damage sexual relationships and the treatment of women? I'd say yes.

My focus is not on women who love having a fist in their vagina, whether they exist or not. I don't particularly care. My focus is on the rest of us.

Coercion is not, ime, about getting women to engage in acts they enjoy. It's about pushing the envelope further and further, legitimised by being able to say it's 'normal' and you're a 'prude' if you don't. Of course there are lots of different experiences. But to deny that one in favour of saying all sexual acts are on a level playing field does not match my experience.

To clarify, the 'that's not what I see' comment is in relation to your characterisation of feminist debate.

Alice: It is what I have seen (which of course doesn't mean it's universal, it means I have experienced it, just as you not having experienced it doesn;t mean it doesn't exist).

Anyway, here's an even more interesting article about sex. And I don't think it contains the word 'cis' at all.

It is interesting but I find it entirely without love, care, compassion, empathy, joy and enthusiasm.

I could drum up a few more words. But I don't want to make it even more negative.

Seriously, sex is joyful. But sex is what exactly? Is it that penis in vagina (PIV) is the default? Or rampant rabbit in vagina RRIV? Or any object? Because if you are in possession of a vagina you are seen by the opposite sex as an object, due to centuries of patriarchial influence.

It wasn't always that way. Sex is joyful no matter who you have it with, but it doesn't have to involve a penis(i), fist, object. It is about intimacy and a sharing of excitement, and physical communication that is non threatening. It is about being entirely comfortable with the person you are with.

Sorry Dworkin are you referring to the first article or the second? I don't agree with the second author's conclusions but I thought that some of the points she made were worth thinking about.

I always thought CIS and TRANS was a biochemical term See, that would have made my degree sooooo much more interesting

Trans* people might be a small minority but in an article that is specifically about challenging phallocentric heteronormative sex, it seems reasonable to use cis to denote exactly which group you are talking about.

Hmm this old thread hasn't aged like a fine wine... Where is solidgoldbrass these days?