MaleSubmissionArt.com or Why I Am Crowdsourcing My Own Pornography

Category labels: Community, Erotica and pornography, Male sexuality, Masculinity, Myths and misconceptions, Politics of sex, Technology, Writing and blogging

So, here’s the problem: There is not enough porn wherein submissive men are the erotic subject matter.

If you’ve read even a little bit of this blog, you’re probably already well-versed in many of my rants about how paltry the available porn is for submissive men like me (and, by extension, dominant women like Eileen). But the problem is actually two fold. One problem is, of course, that there’s simply an insanely disturbing general lack of the stuff. In fact, it’s so bad that if you Google for the three words “male submission art,” you actually get female submission links littering the first page of results.

This is actually even worse if you go actively hunting for porn with the hopes of finding erotica depicting men who are submissive. Instead, you’re much, much more likely to find erotica depicting women who are dominant. This is actually a major nuisance for a lot of people—including many submissive men, I might add.

Arguably even more frustrating that that, however, is that what male submissive porn is out there is total shit relative to the porn available for other sorts of orientations. In such erotica (unless it’s gay imagery, of course) men are portrayed as impotent, ugly creatures. That is not sexy. It’s also insulting.

Announcing MaleSubmissionArt.com: Art and visual erotica that depicts masculine submission

My proposed solution? I launch MaleSubmissionArt.com and have people send me hot pics of men being submissive. I figure there just has to be enough people out there as fed up with this situation as I am, and if I can get some of them to send me contributions from their personal stashes of erotica or while they are browsing the Internet hunting for more, I’ll be able to crowd-source the content for a shared porn collection full of the kind of stuff we actually like.

Best of all, even though this project is based around me wanting to have one easy place to go get beautiful pictures of sexy tortured men, it has the potential to really change the way people think about creating erotica around the notions of male submission. Specifically, as the site description states:

We showcase beautiful imagery where men and other male-identified people are submissive subjects. We aim to challenge stereotypes of the “pathetic” submissive man.

I’d be thrilled to be able to get a steady stream of hot male submission action into everyone’s RSS feeds daily, but to do that I need your help in scouting out sources for this kind of porn. I’m very much hoping that those of us in the sex blogging community will spread the word about the site. I’m also hoping that those of you able to contribute will do so in any of the ways I’ve outlined on the MaleSubmissionArt.com project page.

So, do you think we’ll be able to stem the tide of portraying submissive men in horribly unattractive ways?

Submit this content to FetSpank.com

Rocking the Boat. By which I mean I also enjoy a good facial

Category labels: Bisexuality, Community, D/s dynamics, Gender fluidity, Male sexuality, Masculinity, Myths and misconceptions, Politics of sex, Sexism

Eileen is always berating me for being an ass. It’s true: I’m kind of an ass. I’m probably mostly an ass when I’m wiggling my bum at her trying to get attention so she’ll spank me or fuck me or something like that, but she claims I’m also often an ass when I’m writing in mailing lists or leaving comments on people’s blogs. This is fair, I like to rock the boat—I’ll admit I enjoy the confrontational style of debates.

I very recently did exactly this (although I was much nicer than I could have been) on a local young-persons-in-Sydney group’s mailing list. I remarked that I had done so, and due to popular demand and interest with regards to my remarks, am going to share a single edited excerpt of that thread here. In case anyone is local and cares to join the group, here is my original post.

The year is 2008. The place is Sydney, Australia. The topic is male bisexuality in the BDSM community. The population of the scene here…well, the population of the country is barely the size of the state I came from. These people are not “simple, country folk” by any stretch of the imagination, yet I can’t help but feel as though I’ve been transported to a kink scene from ten years ago:

Congratulations in advance to those of you who actually follow and read the linked references. Those of you who don’t will assume I am just rocking the boat. I am, of course (rocking the boat that is)—though I’m trying to do so while adding significant substance to the conversation.

On Aug 4, 2008, at 5:07 PM, Person A wrote:

In my brief time in the sydney bdsm scene, i’ve noticed girls are a lot more willing to play with other girls than guys are to play with other guys. why do yo think this is? Do you think bisexuality is more comon in girls in the vanila world too. Do girls who engage in bdsm play with other girls even consider themselves bisexual. looking forward to your comments

for the record I am 100% straight male.

So is my male dom top friend who is dating a boy. Though labels like “staight” or “bi” can be useful, they are ultimately meaningless. It’s actions, not words, that define people and who they are.

Person A then wrote:

I’d feel uncomfy playing with a guy, even if just tieing me up etc. how do other guys feel.

Lots of “straight” guys feel this way while encouraging girls to get it on with one another, and if you haven’t noticed most guys in the BDSM community you’re a part of are straight. Perhaps that’s why you’ve noticed that girls are a lot more willing to play with other girls than guys are to play with other guys. Huh. Imagine that.

See also this satire: http://bloodylaughter.com/2007/07/26/eureka/

On Aug 4, 2008, at 5:34 PM, Person B wrote:

that’s because girls are just the more attractive sex, is my guess.

Person B, we’re both lucky we don’t really know each other because it makes it a lot easier for me to tell you that you’re being an ass right now.

On Aug 4, 2008, at 7:54 PM, Person B tried to redeem his statements by qualifying them like this:

I meant that in the most objective way possible, which is not to say that I don’t find certain guys attractive and would even consider certain BDSM scenarios involving that person, but it happens very
very rarely for me and he’d have to be pretty fit. And I think most girls would agree with me that girls tend to be more attractive than guys in general. Is that true or have just been speaking to the the wrong girls?

You’re oozing the kind of heteronormativity that makes me dislike heteronormative spaces—like this list right now. Personal preferences are one thing, but trying to pass these off as “statements intended in the most objective way possible” belies your ignorance. Again, I say that heteronormative culture encourages exactly this kind of thinking.

See also:

http://maybemaimed.com/2007/08/21/i-want-to-be-a-pretty-boy/
http://maybemaimed.com/2007/12/12/the-rules-of-flirting-are-sexist-and-wrong/
http://bitchyjones.wordpress.com/2007/07/17/the-unfairest-of-them-all/

On Aug 4, 2008, at 6:02 PM, Person C wrote:

hi all, long time lurker first time poster. I consider myself a straight male as i can’t really see myself being with a male sexually without bondage being a huge part. It was something that i was very nervous about until my Mistress at the time introduced me to the concept of playing firstly with couples and then eventually she was happy (as was i) for me to play solely with makes. Fem Dom’s are still my preference however my desire to please outways if there are dangly bits or not. Now i’m “out” i hope to catch up with some of you soon

And then, right on cue, on Aug 4, 2008, at 6:33 PM, Person D wrote:

Here’s my theories.

Girl on girl is a bit more socially acceptable than guy on guy due to the fact with guys there is the implied image of things up the arse.

Yes, exactly. God forbid something goes the “wrong way” up a man’s butt. Of course, every straight guy knows women’s asses are a two way street.

This is precisely why the feared “image of things up the [guy's] arse” has become the femdom cumshot in porn, and it’s where this (insulting) notion of “forced bi”—which is pretty much exclusively a femdom/malesub dynamic—comes from. Now, I love getting fucked in my ass, but I love getting fucked on my penis, too. In other words, being the person who does the penetrating does not equate to having power, or masculinity. Perverting (and I use that word deliberately) anatomy to create falsehoods of power imbalance is nothing more complicated than plain stupid.

See also:
http://bloodylaughter.com/2007/07/11/fuck-him/
http://maybemaimed.com/2007/08/12/pegging-gets-mainstream-attention-and-kinky-porn-gets-rightfully-slapped-upside-its-head/

Portions removed at the author’s request.

You’ve hit the nail on the head, though you’re not tying it all together quite yet. This is the same masculine heteronormative sexuality that defines male sexuality based on dominance and power, only it’s now happening in reverse. Where the former circumstance is one in which a man is dominant and thus validates hegemonic masculinity, this circumstance is one in which a man is submissive to another even more masculine/dominant/powerful man and thus validates hegemonic masculinity. As far as genders studies students are concerned, this is just a situation where you have six of one thing and half dozen of the other.

In other words, men’s fantasies that are geared around being submissive to a “real man” merely enforce the hegemonic masculine stereotype. Now, that’s not bad (it’s quite sexy—I personally love the idea of submitting to a strong, dominant, het guy I find physically attractive) it’s just very, well, we’ve all been there and done that.

See also:
http://bitchyjones.wordpress.com/2008/07/18/submissive-men-and-the-humanity-gap/
http://maybemaimed.com/2007/12/18/how-an-outdated-view-of-masculinity-ignores-the-needs-of-all-men/

Anyway, for more insights on gender and male sexuality, see this 10 minute video:

http://maybemaimed.com/2007/12/06/transgender-basics/

Regards,

-maymay
Blog: http://maybemaimed.com
Volunteering: http://ConversioVirium.org/author/maymay

Submit this content to FetSpank.com

Sexism at Large in American Politics: Armed and Dangerous

Category labels: BDSM in the media, BDSM safety, Masculinity, Politics of sex, Sexism, Vanilla life

I’ve never been extremely thorough about pursuing political current events, but I’m finding myself ever more personally withdrawn from American politics now that I’m living in Sydney and no longer living in America. However, I actually feel more knowledgeable about American politics now than I did when I lived in New York City, mostly because local people here won’t stop asking my opinions on things.

It’s funny to me, how much Australians are interested in the happenings in America. I suppose that makes sense, but as an American who (like the stereotype) never really realized how much of an influence America was to the rest of the world, it’s taking me a little by surprise.

Anyway, needless to say, I’ve been keeping up (a bit) with the Democratic national primary. It’s hard not to. The whole world was practically sitting on the edge of its seat wondering who will win. A black man or a white woman as candidates give rise to only two topics in the right’s conservative hypocrisy: racism and sexism.

This was such a heated race that I’ve even received regular emails from some people in my extended family about it. Their emails are extremely strongly-worded short essays with arguments as to why I should or shouldn’t vote for Obama or Clinton (though mostly only because of the candidates’ opinions on Israel, which I couldn’t really care much about anyway). I’m thinking of telling them to start a blog.

I really have no opinion one way or the other about the merits of either candidate—I’m simply not very well informed. That said, Debra Haffner linked this 5-minute video produced by the Women’s Media Center showcasing myriad clips of all the sexist remarks made about Hillary during her campaign. I rarely link videos in this blog, but this one is worth your time.

There’s a lot of sexist language harassing women in this video, since its goal is to showcase how the media is sexist against women. However, that’s just half the story. There’s at least an equal if not greater amount of sexist language in today’s media against men since, obviously, most public political discussion happens about and between men. Where’s the highlight reel of political pundits proclaiming that some candidate “doesn’t have the balls” to do something brave?

One reason I’m more than a little withdrawn from politics is because I know I’ll never be elected to public office. Even if I had the aspirations, I would simply never survive a smear campaign. I mean, look at this blog!

Indeed, back in the “good old days” when I used to stay at Paddles, the local NYC public BDSM club until 4 AM, that was even a joke. The lot of us, my friends and I, would stumble up the stairs in the dark and then burst out onto the street like mole-people, bleary eyed from a long night. We used to joke with another, “Well, I’m certainly not running for public office after tonight!” the implication being that we’ve done yet another thing that would get us booted immediately if the word got out.

While this threat is meaningless to me, since I don’t want to be in public office anyway, I have met more than a few people over the years for whom this is a real concern. They remain anonymous to this day precisely because they do, at some point, want to be in public office in order to make our government better, and most of them don’t even want to get into the areas of sexual rights. They’ll never have a blog like this, though, because having a blog like this—doing what I’m doing right now—means I’ll never win a race for public office.

But hey. I still get to vote. And of course, I will.

Submit this content to FetSpank.com

Why Orgasm Logger? Well, why not?

Category labels: BDSM in the media, BDSM psychology, BDSM techniques, Chastity/Orgasm denial, Communication, D/s dynamics, Humor, Myths and misconceptions, Orgasm Logger, Personal history, Politics of sex, Sex, Sexual teasing and control, Technology

This is majorly cool: Viviane linked Orgasm Logger in her Links for January 4th, 2008 post and it’s since been picked up by Boinkology, and a few higher-profile bloggers are beginning to display Orgasm Logger counters on their sites, too, like Tom Paine. A few months ago, a search for “Orgasm Logger” revealed only a handful of hits but now Google shows over 1,300 results, which is quite a bit for a project I put a single night’s effort into months ago primarily for my own, personal use.

I’ve also been seeing discussions about Orgasm Logger surface on message boards and other blogs every so often. It’s a lot of fun to read through the discussions people are having and to see what they’re saying about it. Here are some telling examples.

This woman, on an Informed Consent discussion thread, says:

Having orgasms isn’t a competitive activity, it’s just something that happens, or doesn’t and it certainly shouldn’t be used as a measure of anything. In my opinion.

I have to say I agree with her regarding her view on the usefulness of orgasms as a competitive measure, but I disagree that it shouldn’t be used as a measure of something. Measure of what is the question. Well, I think that’s up to the person doing the measuring.

I never think of orgasms as competitive, just a lot of fun. They’re fun to have, and they’re fun for some of us not to have, and the fact that some of us are having more than others is also a lot of fun for some of us. I don’t think there’s anything in this world that turns me on more reliably and so thoroughly as watching my lover have a screaming-good orgasm. For me, when she has ten or twenty, or maybe even a hundred and I haven’t had one, that’s an even sexier thought. I like the disparity in the numbers, but I don’t feel competitive about it.

Naturally, kinky people into chastity play and orgasm control see the value of this tool really quickly. Later in the same thread, another woman writes:

I think the ‘logging’ idea would be a nice little extra feature for those who do chastity play.

And then another guy echoes her sentiment:

I can imagine it might be of use if a man were in a sort of chastity arrangement without a device i.e. based on trust, and monitored by a domme at a remote location.

Curvaceous Dee is (fittingly) ahead of the curve by already having experienced first-hand the intent of Orgasm Logger:

It was a great relief to finally come again. The very useful Orgasm Logger has confirmed to me over the past few months what I’d suspected for a while—that I like to get off every couple of days. Doesn’t matter too much whether it’s self-pleasure or pleasure with partners (both have their moments), but, almost like clockwork, every two days on average will see me gushing, groaning, and generally feeling great. Which explains why I’m always running out of ‘bedroom towels’….

Indeed, as she points out, keeping track of stuff let’s you know more about that stuff.

Here’s another blogger’s comment, one I really love:

I clicked, and found out this guy had his last [orgasm] 3.58 days ago, and this is a feed from an actual Orgasm Logger site! What an add-on to one’s blog! The ultimate in advance orgasm management strategy systems!

The ultimate in advanced orgasm management strategy systems? I think this blogger coined a new acronym: OMSS! Naturally, I can think of dozens of improvements to Orgasm Logger so I’m not going to be calling this thing “the ultimate” any time soon.

Of course, Lux of Boinkology said it best:

We’re both fascinated and confused by this application

In fact, that’s been the most common reaction, and it’s really interesting to me. Long before I created Orgasm Logger, I’d just been naturally keeping a tally on my orgasms. It seems to me like most everyone does this, if only not as mindfully as I do. Of course, what made me mindful about keeping track of my orgasms in the first place was my near-fetish for orgasm control, in a sexually submissive headspace.

I got really serious about keeping track of my orgasms about two years or so before I created Orgasm Logger. At first, I simply wrote down when my last one was, so I’d always know. Then I wanted to be able to easily share that piece of information with Eileen, so she’d be able to know whenever it interested her. To make that happen, I started recording my orgasms as events on my personal calendar, publishing those events as an iCalendar to a local WebDAV server I run for the two of us here at home, and then subscribed her iCal to the calendar feed I was publishing.

It worked flawlessly. Now I had a real database of all my recorded orgasms with embedded date and time, location, and participant information! It was pretty much all I needed. But it wasn’t perfect.

It didn’t do the things I was most interested in, which was tell me at-a-glance how long it had been since my last orgasm, the most personally interesting datum. I had to do that calculation every time I wanted to know. What’s today’s date? When was the date of my last orgasm? What’s the difference between then and now?

Obviously, computers are the answer to computational problems, so I started thinking about how I could get the computer to do everything I wanted. In the process, it occurred to me that lots of people heavily into orgasm control are always talking about “how long it’s been” or “what their last one was like.”

Hell, people who aren’t even kinky are talking about their orgasms left and right, up and down, inside and out, this ways and that ways! Moreover, the entire political debate over contraception, abortion, teen pregnancies, abstinence-only sex education, and a host of other issues, are all centered around exactly this topic: orgasms!

None of this would even be happening if it weren’t for orgasms, but I’ve yet to hear someone acknowledge that simple fact. It’s as though, if you were an alien, you’d think orgasms were what made the world go ’round, but nobody was allowed to talk about them directly.

Which brings me to my point. Orgasms are really important for a lot of people. What’s interesting, then, is why it’s so puzzling to so many people that I’ve made a tool to help people keep track of them. After all, throughout history, the one thing people have continued to do with nearly no change in behavior at all is come up with ways to keep track of the stuff that’s important to them.

No value judgement, no assumptions, just an awareness of what’s important to people and the benefits that can be garnered from using increasingly sophisticated tools to broaden that awareness. That’s what Orgasm Logger is about, for me. That’s what I think everything should be about, on a philosophical level.

No one would have looked at me askance if I wrote improvements to banking software, because money is very important to a lot of people. That’s why it’s tracked so rigorously. That’s why it’s used as a competitive measure of status, of wealth, and of many other things, even though a lot of us think that it shouldn’t be.

Why, then, do orgasms seem so out of place? Maybe the answer to that question is also the answer to a lot of other things that we as a country, a culture, and a species, are struggling with. Maybe understanding value, understanding why the things that are important to us are important, things that are currently so deeply ingrained in the cultural tropes of our society that we don’t even realize we can question, will help us in ways we can’t even imagine today.

That’s what I’m puzzling over.

Update: News of the existence of Orgasm Logger is still spreading, and it’s still getting the typical, puzzled and, in some cases, even hostile reactions I can pretty much expect from the mainstream world-at-large. Latest sighting was at a site called Dear Sugar.

Submit this content to FetSpank.com

Wednesday Wanderings #9: Winds of Change

Category labels: BDSM psychology, Femdom, Male sexuality, Politics of sex, Stupid submissives, Technology, Wednesday Wanderings

It’s Wednesday, so let’s just dive right in!

  • For a long, long time I wished I had been sent to a Montessori school when I was younger because one of my tried-and-true learning techniques comes from making associations between things other people would not typically realize could be applicable to one another. I made one such connection when I started reading Susan Mernit’s excellent blog about social media, social networks, citizen journalism, web technologies, sexuality, online dating, and so, so much more. Reading her blog makes me feel like I’m discovering, and continually rediscovering, value in so many places; I feel like Susan’s a sort of kindred spirit, and would recommend her blog to everyone.

    Two pieces of Susan’s writing was also picked as BlogHer’s best picks of December 2007. One was called Breaking up: When do you stop loving someone? and the other was titled Not choosing monogamy: Why exclusivity doesn’t matter. Both of them are excellent pieces that I think are worth your time. Her blog is a fantastic read if you’re at all interested in Internet culture and technologies, sexuality, and especially if you’re interested in both!

  • One of the writers who sometimes makes me feel as though she could have been a fly on the wall of every conversation I’ve ever had with myself is the Subversive Submissive. As a female submissive, many of the issues she writes about are not the ones I have, yet every once in a while, I’m perusing my news feeds and something she wrote will just stand up and grab me.

    One of these posts is this post of hers in which she talks about her personal approach to BDSM and why it’s put strain on her relationship:

    I have something of a history of (a) not feeling comfortable with my own sexuality and kinks, and (b) not trusting that my sexual partner is actually interested in the sort of sex and the sort of relationship I desire.

    […]

    But I realize now that I’ve been disappointed in him for not coming at this in the same way that I do; I’ve been disappointed that he doesn’t write about all of this, doesn’t comment here, doesn’t read any BDSM nonfiction, doesn’t initiate taking classes with me. And that’s just holding him up to an absurd and unrealistic expectation. There’s no reason why he should have to approach BDSM in the same way that I do.

    Or this one, about what it’s like not to feel submissive sometimes:

    It’s the nights when the same thing we did two weeks ago not only fails to arouse me, but irritates me. It’s the nights when I have zero interest in any kind of sex at all. And it’s also the nights when I find myself wanting to just climb on top of him and fuck him until I come.

    She works out issues so carefully and intelligently that, if she really is anything like me, I’m certain of two things. First, that she is shielding readers like me from the incredible turmoil that she must go through to reach such insightful moments of clarity. Second, that what she has to say is going to be valuable regardless of your orientation.

    It’s nothing short of a real delight whenever I see a new post appear from her corner of the Web. Go check her blog out. You can get there from my blog roll.

  • This week the ever-thoughtful Richard Evans Lee came out with an excellent, must-read post called Femdom Kink is Vanilla. His observations, that kinky people and vanilla people seeking relationships with one another have the same complaints (women wanting conversations, men wanting stereotypes), have been made before but never seem to subside. In this post Richard is able to map the vanilla versions to the kinky versions of these facts to one another and back again and the result is an illuminating entry that deserves a spot in your “send this to the hopeless stupid submissive” bookmarks folder. (What? Doesn’t everyone have one of those?)
    In talking with other kinky people about BDSM relationships it has been nagging at me for some time how closely what I say is what I would say to anybody looking for a romantic partner.

    And how annoyingly the words map into gender stereotypes.

    […]

    Where BDSM departs from vanilla is that the former is never going to be satisfied with bodily beauty. The latter can be satisfied - if only for a single night - by arrangements of muscles and bodyfat. The former will never be happy without some meshing of minds.

    That heterosexual male bottoms often don’t grasp this is why even though there are probably far more of them than female tops the limitations of the former are an equalizer of the wrong sort.

  • Dovetailing perfectly off the last item, the latest post by Joscelin, an intelligent and young submissive man whose blog has been on my blog roll for a while, posits a possible (at least partial) solution to the problem of ignorant submissive men that is so obvious it bears repeating: sex education for the adolescent submissive man. Joscelin says:
    I feel like now that I’m 24, my sexual education is finally getting started. I finally realize that intercourse has never been a big priority for me; I’m more interested in scenes anyway. This has had the convenient side-effect of making me appear not to be a sex-crazed loser who only wants a score. I am, I just have a differeing definition of “score.” As such, traditional sexual education failed to even address most of my questions, let alone answer them correctly.

    […]

    The marginalization of female dominant’s sexuality involved limits the females that are willing to dominate men. Additionally, a substantial unmet demand is created, i.e., a professional market, which in many ways worsens the problem. One obvious solution that I’ve never read before is sexual education of adolescent submissive men.

    I sincerely doubt I’ll see this happen in America in my life time, especially with the Federal government actively sabotaging attempts at fairly balanced sex-ed, but one day I hope this obviously positive thing won’t be such a radical thought. Like Joscelin, I first learned the majority of information about my sexuality from Internet pornography, ninety-nine percent of which was absolute bullshit and, thankfully, had a noticeably weaker impact on me than the vast majority of other submissive men out there. It shouldn’t be a mystery why I want better for the next generation.

That’s all for now. A lot of my time and energy at the moment is being spent scheduling my last month in the United States before the big move to Sydney. I’m at the state where I can just begin to feel the winds of change gaining strength. They’re not gale force yet, but they’re getting stronger.

Submit this content to FetSpank.com

America’s Sexual Sampler Platter: Everything but Me is on the Menu

Category labels: BDSM in the media, Bitter and jealous, D/s dynamics, Male sexuality, Masculinity, Myths and misconceptions, Politics of sex, Rant, Sexism

I get that New Years is a time of resolution, a time when people feel compelled by the time of year to make themselves better. The holidays are over, all that weight is back around your midsection, and there’s never been a better time to get back in shape, to stop that bad habit, to become better with women, to…on and on and on.

On the second of January I received an astonishingly fitting pair of postal letters. The first letter was the new catalogue of The Stockroom, one of the largest online sex toy retailers, and the second letter was from a local church that promised me blessings for using their special prayer rug. Dear readers, I kid you not! Of course, I promptly tossed the Jesus-decorated prayer rug in the trash, flipped through the Stockroom’s catalogue until I got bored seeing women tied up, and then gave it to Eileen, since she’s far more excited by that idea than I will ever be.

I suppose it should strike me as not at all odd that I’m seeing a disturbing influx of sexist, incendiary material fill every possible orifice of my news feeds. Most infuriating of all is that it’s not even that much more than usual, which is to say that the litany of aggravating material I’ll briefly discuss below is far more often the rule rather than the exception and that, itself, is the most depressing thing about them.

First, via The Sex Carnival, this Boinkology post links to SellYourSexTape.com with more cheerful humor than I could ever muster. It showcases with quite explicit flair exactly how marginalized a sexuality like mine is, as if there wasn’t enough of that already.

[…]if you want to make the big money ($2000, for the curious), you’ll have to document your sex life for an hour a day for an entire week, making sure to keep it interesting. Bonus points for shots of “daily life” and minimal shots of the boyfriend — this is straight porn, after all.

Oh, and kinksters need not apply: “Sex scenes should be natural and loving and happy, no violence, but don’t forget the money shots! Do not include anything illegal or “obscene”. ie. no interspecies, no golden showers, no forced sex, etc.”

Once again we have these time-honored, incredibly insulting assumptions about porn and sexuality. Men consume, women are the product. Anything that isn’t straight, hetero-normative sex is “unnatural,” or “obscene.” Rougher, more “violent” sex is okay so long as it’s the woman on the bottom, for “the money shot,” but if you can call it kinky then it’s immediately cut. No concern is ever paid to the woman’s sexual satisfaction, as long as we get to see the man ejaculating. Also, we don’t want to look at men because men aren’t sexy, they’re just facilitators; a man’s value is in his finances.

In an even more mainstream outlet, Tom found the kicker when he came across AskMen.com’s recent article called, of all things, How to Dominate and Dominant Woman. Augh! As Tom put it rather succinctly:

Because, you know, [women] all secretly want to be submissive. Not to mention that they will respect men who do this.

I could barely get through the introduction to this article without gritting my teeth:

We often associate dominant women with whips, chains and a pitiful man groveling at their feet while licking a pair of vinyl boots. This certainly occurs with some regularity, but you may be surprised to learn that dominance doesn’t always translate into sadism. On the contrary, many dominant women play the superior role in relationships simply because their man hasn’t learned how to dominate them. She may be strong-willed, feisty and independent, but this doesn’t mean she doesn’t want to be ravished like any other female might. If you’re ready to take charge in the bedroom, the following tips will show you precisely how to sexually dominate a dominant woman.

It’s precisely this kind of narrow-mindedness that keeps both men and women enslaved to gender ideals that make only a very small percentage of real men and women happy. In one fell swoop, this introduction alone manages to insult just about every possible orientation I can think of, including submissive men (by calling us “pitiful”), dominant women (by implying they should be playing an “inferior” role in a relationship), and dominant men (by stating rather explicitly that not dominating a dominant woman means they haven’t been ready to “take charge” yet). I think the only insult I’m not seeing is one aimed at submissive women—but that’s probably because they’re so inconsequential anyway that their influence doesn’t really matter in the first place.

(Elizabeth, please do an 87-part series on this. Please. PLEASE!)

From yet another corner of the blogosphere I was shown this “orgasmic experience simulator” that, while obviously someone’s idea of a joke, basically denigrates the male sexual experience as devoid of diverse value even though it seems to be making fun of the female orgasm at first glance. The simulator is a simple two buttons, one for experiencing orgasm as a male and another as a female. Click the male button and your browser window shakes just a smidgen and you’re presented with the following JavaScript alert box:

Total Time (including undressing, dressing and somking a cigarette): 58 seconds

Press the female button and you’re guided through numerous jump-through-the-hoops alert dialogues that ends in a climactic window-shaking experience. This is an example of the prevalence of the misguided belief that men are all the same, the same belief that has that disgusting AskMen.com article thinking the only submissive men are pitiful examples of masculinity.

But wait, there’s more!

Lolita found a video about which she asks “is it bondage porn, or an Agent Provocateur video?” Once again, all I see is blatantly misogynistic understandings of sex, with (once again) submissive women centerfolds. What’s striking about this instance is that it is so obviously an advertisement directed towards both men and women, yet it is still women on which the camera unapologetically focuses throughout the entire video. The message is, once again, crystal clear: it’s the female form and only the female form worth embracing for the singular purpose of abating the carnal desire of men.

Poor, hapless, helpless men, one might think! In both the vanilla world and the kink world men are treated very much the same: as victims of their own biology, always thinking with the wrong head. Control sex, it’s thought, and you control a man, because sex is worth more to men than anything else. How much more? Good question!

Thankfully, Eileen showed me this post of Bad Man’s that links to CostOfSex.com, which has a handy calculator to show us exactly how much time, effort, and money men spend each day on their high-priced hookers called girlfriends and wives. Oh, and hookers. Can’t forget the hookers. The takeaway from this link is that the message of men-as-monetary-value and women-as-sexual-value is so ingrained in men themselves, that they are taking a perverted sense of pride in their efforts to get the most sex for the least amount of money. That is, after all, exactly how men are taught to prove their manliness!

Lest you think that it’s only people like you and me who can see the sexism here, note that the CostOfSex.com calculator is courtesy of a site that calls itself Mr. Sexist. They sell T-Shirts. Want to know my favorite?

I’ve got an 8-inch thick wallet.

I do realize cultural and sexual progress doesn’t happen at the blindingly fast pace that we’re all used to technological advancements happening, but, seriously…if this is what 2008 has in store for me, I’m going to keep wishing I could hibernate until 3008 rolls around. Again, I do realize some of these are jokes—and yes, they’re kind of funny in that “I’m only half-joking” sort of way. What hurts me right now about all of these things is the insurmountable disparity of privilege in regards to sexual power—in what ways power is or is not okay to be shared or expressed—that results in the stigmatization or, worse, the invisibility of submissive men like me (and, for that matter, dominant women, too).

Will it really take ’til 3008 to stop hurting?

Submit this content to FetSpank.com

The Sexism of Politeness

Category labels: Masculinity, Personal experience, Politics of sex, Sexism, Vanilla life

There’s been some interesting talk of the so-called “Politics of Politeness” by Rona, inspired by Dev’s comment on a recent post of mine. In the spirit of story telling, I want to share two relevant brief anecdotes that have been burned into my memory for all time.

When I was just getting into the job market after dropping out of school, one of my early jobs was that of a lowly office technician. I was handy with the computers, but I was also handy at running errands. On several occasions, I would fetch lunches or coffee from Starbucks for my office-mates and bosses.

One time, the office had a particularly large order for Starbuck’s Coffee. I was sent out to retrieve it. The order overflowed two trays (that’s 8 drinks plus snacks) and was a challenge to carry, but I managed. I managed, that is, until I got to the doorway of our office building.

The doorway was manned by a security guard. Not a doorman, mind you, a security guard. When I reached the door and tried to open it, I couldn’t. I was juggling too many things in my hands to get the door open without dropping or spilling this thing or that. I glanced over at the security guard on the other side of the glass but despite making eye contact he made no motion toward me, so I tried the door again.

Then, out of nowhere, this tall blonde woman was beside me holding only a small purse, standing in front of the doors. Suddenly the security guard had the door wide open, the woman walked through it without ever acknowledging either of us, and the security guard let go of the door before I even stepped inside. Thankfully, I was small and quick enough to literally slide through the open doorway as it was closing.

Now, all of this happened in the span of about thirty seconds or so, so there is more story here than there is necessarily fact. Nevertheless, I will remember those few seconds for the rest of my life because of the incredible rush of frustration I felt in that moment. What assholes, I was thinking to myself, the security guard for being utterly sexist and the woman for her pretentious attitude of entitlement.

In my generous moments, I think that perhaps the security guard thought I would be insulted if he offered unsolicited help in opening the door and perhaps the woman, for her part, was simply very busy. But I doubt both of these things.

Another similar moment happened not long ago when Eileen, Sinclair, and I were leaving one of Viviane’s recent tea parties. We were putting on our coats and since I had exited the party last, I was the last one to finish getting bundled up in preparation for the cold outside. Then I noticed that Sinclair was holding my coat up.

For a moment, I froze and wasn’t sure what to do. After the surprise had passed, however, I continued putting on my coat with Sinclair’s help and thanked her for the gesture. Never before had anyone who I wasn’t already very close to held my coat up for me this way, and I remarked on the fact.

What’s funny is that I can remember many times when I have done exactly that for other people and then upon further reflection, I remember, mostly for women (though at times close male friends, too). It is as though, lacking any kind of other information about one’s chosen gender role, I defaulted to this behavior while interacting with feminine-identified people I didn’t know well and not with masculine-identified people I didn’t know well because social mores have taught me to do exactly that. Only once I became friendly with a man, and our relationship changed to a more intimate one (even if not a romantic or sexual one), did I begin to behave in a more gender-agnostic way.

That observation, when applied elsewhere, held true for many other things as well. When saying goodbye to friends, I’m more likely to ask, “Are you sure you’re going to be okay?” if I’m speaking to a woman and more likely to ask, “Are you sure you know your way?” when speaking to a man. I generally wish everyone “safe travels” regardless of their gender, and obviously there are other factors at play here (that men are also susceptible to), but the observation is an interesting one nevertheless.

The conclusion, I think, is that politeness is perceived to be a facet of social interaction that is inexorably linked to gender. In other words, politeness is sexist (or more precisely, genderist) since to do or not do something polite is dependent upon one’s social presentation. That’s an incredibly variable thing.

Assuming that the security guard who didn’t hold the door for me did see me (because, damn, did I ever feel invisible after that!), either he didn’t open the door for me because he was an asshole or he didn’t open the door because he thought that I would feel it impolite if he did, because I was a man. Similarly, he opened the door for the woman because that is what’s “supposed to be” polite in that context.

No one is surprised to hear that gender affects social dynamics, but many people have trouble seeing how other people could possibly have a different understanding than they do. If you open the door for a woman, she may be flattered, or she may be insulted. In such situations where a positive or a negative outcome could result from one’s actions, what is one to do? That’s a tough question!

I think the best generalized solution has been around for a very long time, and Rona got it exactly right when she cited the solution as the golden rule:

Really, though, I think it should come down to the golden rule - treat others as you would wish to be treated yourself… or possibly even better. Don’t adjust your behavior to suit the gender, adjust it to respect the individual.

What this means in the situation with the security guard is that, if I assume his understanding of gender dynamics to be the ones he displayed, he did exactly the right thing. Similarly, if I were in his shoes, I would want someone for whom I did not open the door to first assume I did so out of positive intent. In other words, to make mismatches like this one go over smoothly, we really have to assume everyone’s innocent until proven guilty.

And hey, isn’t that one of those universal human rights? This is, of course, admittedly much more work than just blanketing every social interaction we have with binaries of “polite” or “not polite,” but that’s the price we have to pay for the invaluable benefits of being a social species.

Submit this content to FetSpank.com

Harlem, 2 AM, and Group Dynamics

Category labels: Masculinity, Myths and misconceptions, Personal experience, Politics of sex, Sexism, Vanilla life

It’s Harlem, New York City, and it’s nearly 2 AM. I’m at a friend’s house, having just enjoyed a very fun Christmas day dinner that she and her boyfriend cooked for a few other guests and I. We were served chicken, vegetable cous-cous, mashed potatoes, wine, ice cream, cake, amaretto, and tea. It was delicious, and I’m tipsy, tired, and ready to head home.

I’m only 40 blocks from my apartment, I’m thinking, the subway will take forever, and I’d rather not spend the cash on a cab. I can walk it. So, even though this isn’t something I usually do, I decide to travel on foot.

I call Eileen on my cell phone because she called me moments before I left my friend’s apartment and because I want to talk to her before we each go to bed. After walking a short while, I’ve passed two large groups of hispanic and black men congregated on the sidewalks, never breaking stride and never breaking somewhat idle conversation about something or other with Eileen. I notice one man who is talking to another man eyeing me and then I note that his compatriot turns to look at me, but I continue by and nothing happens.

This is what’s expected. I’m a slender white Jewish boy, five-foot-eight-inches tall with long, curly red hair, glasses, and a long wool coat. I don’t look like I should be out in the middle of Harlem at 2 AM. What was I thinking?

Yet nothing happens. Nothing happens until I’m almost half-way through my journey and, having passed yet another group of almost a dozen rowdy men or so, am feeling somewhat more secure in my march towards home. I mean, I’m not so far away, and it’s not that bad a neighborhood (I’m even about to pass another friend’s house right now), and no one is really out to get me, and certainly not me specifically. What could happen?

I notice a group of six or so girls up ahead. I think almost nothing of it, as I typically don’t. Any real threat comes from men, I’ve been taught to think, since they are the ones who are violent, they are the ones who commit crimes, they are the ones the media has told me to fear.

I walk closer to the group of girls on my way towards home, making sure to stay on the side of the sidewalk closest to the street, furthest away from them. I’m just going home and I want nothing to do with these people. There’s nothing they have that I want and nothing I have that I could imagine them wanting. So what’s the worry?

I notice a taller girl, clearly hispanic, with long curly black hair and wearing a North Face down coat looking at me as I approach. What’s the worry, I remind myself, I’m just a curiosity in these parts at this hour. So I walk on.

As I pass them, my focus is fixed firmly within my peripheral vision, yet I’m still talking to Eileen on my cell phone. This girl’s fixed attention draws the attention of the others and now they’re all looking at me. In an instant, one girl from the small crowd crosses my path not half a foot in front of me and makes a loud noise in my direction, her face nearly pressed right against mine for a moment. I give her a somewhat quizzical but annoyed glance and keep walking.

In the next instant, somewhere between all the yelling that has suddenly and conspicuously begun too abruptly to be coincidence, I hear another girl yell, “Your nose needs surgery!” I look to my left to see one of the girls standing next to me with her arm raised in a fist. I put up my hand in a defensive posture, feel my breath catch, and my heart race. I hear the tall girl with the long black curls say with a grin in her tone, “Don’t you know you shouldn’t ever raise your hands up like that to a woman?!”

Then I feel a light pat on my butt and a cacophony of laughter. I whirl around to face all of these girls, unsure of what to do. “Jesus fucking christ,” I mutter to myself—on Christmas night no less—but keep walking onwards at an even more quickened pace. There are more shouts after me. I turn back around and hurry off.

Eileen is asking if I’m okay. “Yeah,” I say. “I’m fine…. Will you stay on the phone with me ’til I get home?”

I talk as much as I can on the way home even though, now, I am having two distinct conversations. One conversation is the one I have out loud with Eileen, the one my cell phone carries over the wire to her ear. The other is my internal monologue asking questions about what just happened.

Why was it all so appearance-centric? Men, as they have done once in the past, would have demanded money, confrontation, or physical altercation, but these girls were entirely gender-focused, even going so far as bringing up our different sexes vocally. How much of this has to do with race and how much with sexism, for that matter? Furthermore, how much of my reaction, and my fear, has to do with over sensitivity, my lack of a thick-skin, versus a real, perceptible threat? How much is real?

Is it my fault? I bet I just look like an easy target; what do people who aren’t easy targets look like? How can I be more like them? Do I want to? Should I have to? Why did they do this? Was it just for laughs, some harmless immature prodding at my expense? That wasn’t typical feminine behavior; one of them touched my ass! Where did these girls learn that? I have to wonder about how many times each and every one of the girls in that group has had the same experience I just had. How many men have touched them inappropriately?

I’m home now, and I’m fine, yet my mind is still having these thoughts and more. I’m tired and somewhat frazzled from the sudden rush of flight-or-fight impulses coursing through my veins. These girls were just hooligans, probably no real danger.

At some point, analyzing this exchange under a less drunken and more cognitive mindset might prove fascinating. The sexism, the racism, the group dynamics. It’s all fascinating.

But for right now, I’m just thankful to be home safely.

Submit this content to FetSpank.com

Unwelcome: The Emotional Effects of Social Injustice

Category labels: Emotions, Personal experience, Politics of sex, Vanilla life

I spend a lot of time alone. This is not all bad, and sometimes it’s actually very good, and exactly what I want. A loner, as I have been described many times before, is someone who tends to find themselves isolated from social settings, but the description says nothing about why one is isolated.

Holidays are a rough part of the year in the social sense. A lot of people are dealing with familial issues, emotional stresses heavily laden with experiences from years long past resurfacing specifically during this season due to culturally-imposed proximity; all the “good boys and girls” are going home for the Holidays—it’s kind of like their Christmas present tax.

I’m not going to spend lots of time with my family, which makes sense since I am in many ways the epitome of what people no doubt interpret as the prodigal son. Thankfully, this was more true in the past than it is now. Nevertheless, I’m clearly a “bad boy.”

Instead of heading home, I had some hopes for a certain set of plans this week that did not pan out. I wanted to spend some time in a novel activity with Eileen out of the city. Though I had already mostly given up on this plan a while ago because it hinged in part on the hospitality of the family member who had a negative reaction to Eileen’s blog, I was still hoping that we could find a way to make it work, or that we would at least be able to find a suitable plan-B. Unfortunately, I am finding myself simply without her company for a longer time than I had originally expected, stuck in New York City while she enjoys the privileges of her family’s hospitality that I am unwelcome to share.

Similar displays of privilege unshared are forever painful to the underprivileged.

It occurs to me that these sorts of experiences are possibly the root of historical uprisings such as the civil rights movement, the feminist movement, and more recently the LGBT movement (and even more recently—only within the last few years—the asexuality movement). In each case, members of these groups identified that they lacked certain privileges or were stigmatized in some way in their personal lives. They were then able to form communities with other people who were also experiencing the same things and observed uncanny similarities between themselves and the rest of their community. Eventually, they came to the realization that their lack of certain privileges was, in fact, systemic to the culture or society in which they lived and their personal struggles suddenly seemed a valid political cause.

Say hello to “the personal is political.” This is how privileges are turned into rights, and that is sometimes a very slippery slope. Determining which privileges should be rights and which privileges shouldn’t has been the question every civilization since the beginning of recorded history (and probably well before then, too) has grappled with. This is hardly unexplored territory.

However, civilizations are complex and hard to understand. Furthermore, they are always comprised of many thousands or millions of individuals, each with individual experiences, opinions, and emotions. To understand civilizations, it behooves us to also understand individuals. To do that, I begin by trying to understand myself.

Being alone is almost universally expected to make people “feel lonely,” which I think is something of a misunderstanding. Being alone can, of course, cause feelings of sadness due to a lack of friends and company, but it does not innately cause such feelings. What causes feelings of sad loneliness is actually feelings of desire for (possibly specific) social interaction that go unfulfilled; this is what the feeling of missing people (including certain people) actually is.

In other words, on an individual level, it’s having wants or needs that are not met that causes sadness. Applying this same precept to our understanding of cultures, we would see that when social needs go unmet for a large group of people due to (or informed by) a disparity of privilege that is systemic, the underprivileged become second-class denizens of the social arena. This is important because the social arena extends everywhere from the workforce to the bedroom and beyond.

Costly isolation is equivalent to segregation.

Everyone who’s ever been in a relationship has felt the scrutiny of their partner’s loved ones (friends and family alike) sizing you up, making judgments, determining if you’re “good for” them. If you’re not “good for” them, then you feel judged, the thing about you that is not good enough feels as though it is stigmatized, and you feel unwelcome in that person’s presence. To them, you are now someone who is not as worthy of partaking in whatever privileges they have as someone who is better than you would be worthy of doing.

Similarly, I’m sure everyone can remember at least one time in their lives, probably when they were young, at which point their opinion about something was not considered important. As a result you felt unheard, unacknowledged, or dismissed. Not all of these dismissals have been conscious or malicious on the part of other people, but there is little difference in the experience of being dismissed because you are not seen as valuable after examination, and being dismissed because your value simply isn’t seen in the first place.

Whatever the reasons, both of these kinds of experiences can still hurt just as much. These experiences send the undeniable, specific message, “We don’t care for your kind here.” (I find the wording significant: whereas judgement might sound more like, “We don’t want your kind here,” dismissal sounds more like, “We won’t make any effort to meet your needs here.”)

I’ve felt like this many times and in many spaces in my life. I feel this way about the education system at large, which continues to tell me that I’m not “well-educated.” I feel this way when I’m told by co-workers and bosses that I don’t “value my career enough.” I felt this way in my previous relationships when I realized I wasn’t what my (now ex-)girlfriend wanted sexually, and I feel this way now whenever I’m confronted with justifying my sexuality.

Even many kink-friendly spaces, which have very little issue with my presence, are not welcoming to me. Why would I desire to spend time in such places, when they are in effect no different from, say, the coffee shop down the street? Ultimately, the net emotional effect of not feeling welcome is feeling unwelcome.

It’s that feeling I think many social justice advocates are trying to eliminate, not by breaking down the walls between spaces (homogenizing social spaces is actually detrimental to social justice), but by creating more spaces—because feeling welcomed is not a finite resource. Time, however, is limited. So whenever Eileen spends time with people who don’t welcome me into their presence, I’m left wanting, and thinking about how and why value judgments drive people’s motivations.

Submit this content to FetSpank.com

The boy next door is also bisexual

Category labels: Bisexuality, Communication, Community, Gender fluidity, Male sexuality, Masculinity, Myths and misconceptions, Politics of sex, Polyamory, Sex

Today I was wandering around the blogosphere and found a link via The Sex Carnival to this report on a poll about the prevalence of bisexuality that made me stop and think. The brief article touches on quite a few topics that I am finding immediately relevant. These topics are:

  • Hostility towards bisexual-identified people, most confusingly from gay- and lesbian-identified people.
  • A lack of cohesion and inertia in the bisexual community, who often identify with some other community instead (gay, lesbian, kinky, poly, etc.).
  • The harm that is caused by a simplistic understanding of communication, particularly when using language.

These topics are of obvious interest to me because they each affect my social spaces. One of the more startling findings of the poll is that there are apparently more than twice as many bisexual women as there are bisexual men. Or at least, of course, more than twice as many that feel comfortable identifying themselves as such in this poll.

The poll of 768 people, conducted last month, shows in its adjusted final tally that 15.4 percent of respondents are bisexual men and 33.5 percent are bisexual women.

In my personal experience this ratio is even more skewed, but I’m willing to give this finding some credence. To be brain-dead simplistic about the issue, one can say that women who identify as bisexual have an easier time of coming out about it because they just don’t face criticisms from as many fronts as men who identify as bisexual do. Specifically, bisexual women are stereotypically stigmatized only by lesbians, whereas bisexual men are stigmatized by both gay men and by straight men.

One of my strongest dissatisfactions with many of the gay men I’ve interacted with is their blindness towards gender fluidity and how that affects eroticism. This is perhaps one reason why I find myself having trouble finding these men sexy after they open their mouths. They seem so singularly focused on their own version of the masculine ideal that they ignore what I find to be important pieces of my femininity that are necessary to my own erotic fulfillment. The exceptions are the gay men who seem to enjoy femme-y boys, but even in these instances coming out as bisexual seemed to disqualify me to them.

“It’s sad to me that gays and lesbians have such a hard time standing by their bi brothers and sisters,” she said, “because we are really in this fight together, about having our love lives and families validated and respected, no matter what gender we love.”

On the flip side, I have intense trouble socializing with straight men. Consistently, the only straight men who I seem to be able to get along with are the ones who are either sensitive to issues of gender or sexuality (such as those already involved in a sexuality community) or those with whom I can talk technology. When my coworkers invited me out to bars, I declined because the conversation would not have been technology as it was (by necessity) in the office, and that would have quickly become uncomfortable.

In other words, sex is social. That’s a concept I want to explore in further depth later on, but for now suffice it to say that for people with a sex drive, an element of social interactions is sexuality, whether they realize it or not.

Another major issue this article touches upon is the fact that there are very few organized bisexual communities in comparison to other sexuality communities, and that the ones that do exist are fairly small. The most striking example of this was that at the last New York City LGBT Pride March, the bisexual contingent had a grand total of four (4!) people marching in it.

Even the BDSM contingent, who typically have one of the smallest groups in the parade (not including the “leather” sections, though I’m still confused as to why BDSM is contained within leather instead of the other way around), always have at least a dozen people or more marching with them. To be fair, I marched with the BDSM group instead of the bisexual group, and therein lies an example of the lack of visibility of the bisexual community.

I think that, by our nature, almost every one of us holds some other label equally important to us as the bisexual label. I am not just bisexual, I’m kinky, too. Most bisexual men I know are not just bisexual, they’re also polyamorous.

As a result of this multi-focal sexuality (”I like this and this…oh, and this too!”), it’s sometimes difficult for bisexual people to be taken seriously. The common argument is that we just haven’t “chosen” yet, but sooner or later, after enough experience and time, we’ll “settle down” into one of the all-or-nothing choices. (This is the same problem switches have in the BDSM scene: “you’re not really a switch, you’re either a top or a bottom and you just don’t know yet.”)

This point of view is no different from hetero-normative thinking, because it is founded on the principles of mutual exclusion. “You can’t be this and that.” Looking at sexuality this way treats such concepts as attraction as though they are finite resources, as if by being attracted to men you can not possibly have enough “spare attraction” to also be attracted to women, or that if you do then the attraction is lessened in direct proportion to how much attraction you have “spent” elsewhere.

I believe people think this way because they are confusing the things that do, in fact, have limited availability, such as time and physical energy, with things that do not, in fact, have any arbitrary limit. Am I the only person to whom confusing these sorts of things sounds absolutely insane?

Moreover, the idea that this insanity also holds true of language is equally absurd:

“There are plenty of lesbians in the gay community who occasionally sleep with men and still call themselves lesbians and vice versa. People need to start being honest in their daily lives about their actual behaviors rather than hiding behind convenient black-and-white labels that breed acceptance from their gay and lesbian peers who often condemn bisexuality.”

In other words, according to Nicole Kristal, who is quoted from the article above and who is a co-author of The Bisexual’s Guide to the Universe, you’re not a lesbian if you’re a woman who also sleeps with men. This is the equivalent of saying “you’re not a woman if you have a penis,” and we already know how ignorant confusing sex with gender identity is.

Ultimately, what this quote spotlights is the importance of understanding language as a tool for communication. The other day, a friend shared an awesome quote from Confucius with me that she read:

When words lose their meaning, people will lose their liberty.

She told me,

I read something today and thought of you immediately. Apparently, Confucius believed that correct usage of words was a prerequisite to working society. When words stopped being connected to specific meanings, he believed that it was a sign of the impending corruption and collapse of civilization. I like that way of looking at it, [but] I had never heard it put that way before.

It is for that reason why academics like Robert Heasley work so hard at providing a vocabulary with which to discuss things like masculinity, and why people like me work so hard at using such vocabularies to define distinctions between things. Doing so hones our understanding of the meanings of words, which fights rhetoric and propaganda in the process. In the war on sex currently being waged, language is the ultimate weapon.

Submit this content to FetSpank.com