What is sex negative and sex positive?

[Sinister Intents]

What are they? I looked at the Wikipedia page and I didn't find it very educational and I figured the people here would provide a good explanation

[Rosa Partizan]

These terms, as they're used nowadays, mean:

-sex-negative: rejecting male entitlement about female bodies, questioning the male-centered sexuality as seen in media and porn --> you gotta be a hairy, ugly, unfucked prude.

-sex-positive (or as I call it: fuck yeah I do what I want-feminism): condoning male-centered sexuality by calling everything you do to meet its standards "empowering"

anyway, this article by my newest ladycrush Meghan :wub: is awesome.

http://feministcurrent.com/8879/the-divide-isnt-between-sex-negative-and-sex-positive-feminists-its-between-liberals-and-radicals/


To clarify — “sex negative” and “sex positive” are relatively useless terms with regard to discussing feminist approaches to issues of sex and sexuality. The terms convey the message that “sex positivity” equals support for a vision of sex and sexuality that is defined by patriarchy and one that is primarily libertarian. What’s defined as “sex positive feminism” tends to translate to: non-critical of the sex industry, BDSM, burlesque, and generally, anything that can be related to “sex.” “Non-judgement” is the mantra espoused by so-called “sex-positive feminists,” which is troubling because it ends up framing critical thought and discourse as “judgement” and therefore negative. Since I tend to see critical thinking as a good thing, the “don’t judge me”/”don’t say anything critical about sex because it’s sex and therefore anything goes” thing doesn’t sit well with me.


“Sex negative,” on the other hand, tends to be ascribed to feminists who are critical of prostitution, pornography, strip clubs, burlesque, BDSM and, really, sex and sexuality as defined by patriarchy and men. The reason that feminists are critical of these things is because they want to work towards a real, liberated, feminist understanding of sex and sexuality, rather than one that sexualizes inequality, domination and subordination, is male-centered, and is harmful and exploitative of women. To me, that sounds far more “sex positive” (from a feminist perspective, anyway), than blind support for anything sex-related, because sex.

[Tim Cornelis]

^
That's kinda a coloured definition.

Sex-positive feminism would emphasise porn and female sexuality and whatnot as empowerment.

[Sinister Intents]

So based on Rosa's post I'd be sex-negative by what's posted there. I do agree they're rather useless terms though.

I absolutely hate strip clubs and when I've gone to them it has always been the most awkward and gut wrenching experience ever.

I can't stand how my father and so many other men defend their bullshit and defend porn, the sex industry in general ans so forth

[Rosa Partizan]

you gotta get rid of the notion that "positive" in this context is necessarily a good and "negative" a bad thing. If I got to define what sex-positive means, it would be to me sth like "as a woman, exploring your very own sexuality the best you can, apart from media and porn images, apart from male pressure and entitlement, claiming your own satisfaction". But according to how these terms are used actually, I'm sex-negative.

[Sasha]

I would say that "sex-positive" is nothing more than NOT sex-negative. There is no consensus among peopl who identify as sex-positive other than they object to the views espoused by people they consider sex-negative.

And one could make a serious argument that's its the sex-negative people that play into patriarchal and bourgeois class role patterns for women.

[Redistribute the Rep]

I don't like the dichotomy implied by the names, since being critical of porn and male centric views on sexuality doesn't mean you are 'negative' about sex or sexuality in general

[Sinister Intents]

I would say that "sex-positive" is nothing more than NOT sex-negative. There is no consensus among peopl who identify as sex-positive other than they object to the views espoused by people they consider sex-negative.

And one could make a serious argument that's its the sex-negative people that play into patriarchal and bourgeois class role patterns for women.

I think it could be said that both sex negative and sex positive are prone to liberal and reactionary biases, or be of completely distorted and convoluted opinions. I for example used to be anti feminist due to no understanding and having no critique of cultural norms and so forth

[Sabot Cat]

Sex-negative: A view which condemns the entire sex industry and views all participants besides the employers as intrinsically exploited on virtue of their participation. A favored tactic of theirs is claiming that sex-positive people condone sexual slavery and abuse through their support of people in the sex industry even when sex-positive people make it quite clear that's not the case multiple times.

Sex-positive: A viewpoint which holds that sex workers, pornographic actors, and others in the sex industry are not helped by broad condemnations of their entire work, and don't see their work or consumption thereof as inherently or at least especially patriarchal or exploitative. A favored tactic of theirs is claiming that sex-negative people are sanctimonious, alarmist, pearl-clutching puritans who are in cahoots with cultural conservatives, even though they're likely feminists acting in good faith.

[Sinister Intents]

I don't like the dichotomy implied by the names, since being critical of porn and male centric views on sexuality doesn't mean you are 'negative' about sex or sexuality in general

I think dichotomies can be useful if used properly, but often ignores that a spectrum of viewpoints exist. I'm highly critical of both, but I will admit to having a weird porn search history... which often leads me to feeling very grossed out and uncomfortable. I like stuff that's consentual on both parties but that seems almost impossible to find

[Redistribute the Rep]

I think dichotomies can be useful if used properly, but often ignores that a spectrum of viewpoints exist. I'm highly critical of both, but I will admit to having a weird porn search history... which often leads me to feeling very grossed out and uncomfortable. I like stuff that's consentual on both parties but that seems almost impossible to find

The dichotomy implied here is that you're either for or against sex. Which is not the conversation we should be having, nor is it an accurate representation of "sex negative" feminists

[Sasha]

let alone the fact that one does not need to approve off something to oppose its prohibition.

one should be able to personally object to sex-work as a unhealthy way to make your living and perpetuate sexist societal norms and still fight against prohibition as more damaging to women.

[Lily Briscoe]

Yeah, I've seen lots of different perspectives classified as 'sex-negative' and 'sex-positive'. My impression has been that the main dividing line, in practical terms, is between so-called abolitionists, I.e. People who advocate the elimination of prostitution and sex work in the here-and-now and support state 'initiatives' toward this end, versus people who are opposed to this and/or who favor the legalization of prostitution.

[Danielle Ni Dhighe]

-sex-positive (or as I call it: fuck yeah I do what I want-feminism): condoning male-centered sexuality by calling everything you do to meet its standards "empowering"
Yes, that explains all the sex positive queer women out there. It's all about the menz. :rolleyes:

Actually, Wikipedia has a solid definition: "The sex-positive movement is a social movement which promotes and embraces sexuality with few limits beyond an emphasis on safe sex and the importance of consent. Sex positivity is 'an attitude towards human sexuality that regards all consensual sexual activities as fundamentally healthy and pleasurable, and encourages sexual pleasure and experimentation. The sex-positive movement is a social and philosophical movement that advocates these attitudes. The sex-positive movement advocates sex education and safer sex as part of its campaign'."

[Lily Briscoe]

Agree with the first part of your comment, but is there actually some unified 'sex-positive movement' to speak of? My impression has been more that it's a pretty shallow label adopted by people from a huge range of, often diametrically opposed, political traditions, from liberal/bourgeois feminists who want sexual equality within capitalism (moré female CEOs/female porn directors etc) to certain feminist socialists and anarchists who see the oppression of women as being rooted in class society itself.

[Rosa Partizan]

Yes, that explains all the sex positive queer women out there. It's all about the menz. :rolleyes:

Actually, Wikipedia has a solid definition: "The sex-positive movement is a social movement which promotes and embraces sexuality with few limits beyond an emphasis on safe sex and the importance of consent. Sex positivity is 'an attitude towards human sexuality that regards all consensual sexual activities as fundamentally healthy and pleasurable, and encourages sexual pleasure and experimentation. The sex-positive movement is a social and philosophical movement that advocates these attitudes. The sex-positive movement advocates sex education and safer sex as part of its campaign'."

so sex-negative women don't care about sex education, consent and safer sex, ok, lesson learned. What do I need wikipedia for when there's a gap between theory and reality? Sex-positive has become a term widely used by libfems to make every patriarchal aspect of sexuality somehow sound feminist.

Moreover, but this is a different thing, consent isn't good enough. You have probably heard of that Gomeshi thing. When there was just one woman accusing him, it seemed like she had agreed to BDSM. However, in Canada, you can't agree on your own assault. Why do we have to accept the rising of BDSM with women in the submissive role, getting beaten, choked etc? Cause this is was sex-positive people advocate for. Why are we not allowed to question these norms? I don't know what's fundamentally healthy about waking up with bruises, weals etc. and on the other side having a guy enjoy doing this to you. Why don't we question guys that seek pleasure in torturing women, even when it's consented on?

[The Feral Underclass]

It's interesting that people view sex as somehow more exploitative and unhealthy as any job. This fascination that sex-work is somehow a phenomenon outside of all other jobs betrays a sinister kind of moralism. Being a sex-worker is no more exploitative and no more unhealthy than working in a coal mine.

[PhoenixAsh]

Sex positive feminism is the movement within feminism that reacted against sex negative feminism which dominated the feminist discourse in the late 70's to 80's. They reacted against the legislation of womens sexual choices voiced by the sex-negative movement (which advocated amongst others the banning of porn and certain sexual activities).


Sex-positive feminists argued amongst others that sex-negativism played into the patriarchal moralization of womens sexuality and that the way sex-negativism voiced their reaction broadly came down to stating that all porn and all sex acts were bad and rejected the possibility of womens choice and sexual gratification and negatied consensuality. The main critique centers on how it is incredibly judgemental towards women and infantilizing womens sexual desires more often than not resulting in shaming womens sexuality.

It bis interesting to note that sex-positivism does not reject the analysis that society is patriarchal and does not per definition reject the radical feminist analysis.

Sex-negativism extends well beyond porn and prostitution and focussed on all kinds of sexual intercourse and sexual relations, even and in the early days particularly, within lesbian relations where it intersected with lesbian feminism.

[Danielle Ni Dhighe]

so sex-negative women don't care about sex education, consent and safer sex
Where in that quote does it say "sex-negative" people don't care about those things?


Why do we have to accept the rising of BDSM with women in the submissive role, getting beaten, choked etc? Cause this is was sex-positive people advocate for. Why are we not allowed to question these norms? I don't know what's fundamentally healthy about waking up with bruises, weals etc. and on the other side having a guy enjoy doing this to you. Why don't we question guys that seek pleasure in torturing women, even when it's consented on?
You do realize that BDSM has as many, if not more, women dominating men than the reverse, and a lot of queer people also engage in it? For many people, it's about erotic power exchange between two or more people. You can practice BDSM without anyone getting bruised, in fact.

But you underline the problem with "sex-negative"...it's just another form of moralism that tries to control what people do with their bodies. Instead of justifying it with Jesus, you justify it with feminism.

[Danielle Ni Dhighe]

Strix asks if there's a unified sex-positive movement to speak of. Not really. It's diffused among a lot of different types of people.

[Rosa Partizan]

Where in that quote does it say "sex-negative" people don't care about those things?


You do realize that BDSM has as many, if not more, women dominating men than the reverse, and a lot of queer people also engage in it? For many people, it's about erotic power exchange between two or more people. You can practice BDSM without anyone getting bruised, in fact.

But you underline the problem with "sex-negative"...it's just another form of moralism that tries to control what people do with their bodies. Instead of justifying it with Jesus, you justify it with feminism.

I know about the BDSM scene, believe me, I've seen and heard more than you would assume, and it's not as balanced as all those "kink" friends are trying to sell it. But I won't argue with your perception, because you got other experiences than me. And it's not only about BDSM, it goes further to women being submissive, like in Shades of Grey, Twilight (to me, the nonsexual kind of SoG), in porn etc. In society, sexually all time available and submissive women are way more prevalent and desired than sexually dominant ones. Why do we need this power exchange at all? Why do people get so aroused about it?

http://feministcurrent.com/9614/the-economics-of-consent-why-bdsm-and-consumer-capitalism-are-closer-than-you-think/

But yeah, come on, give me another "try to tell people what to do" posting. I've written like 200 times, do whatever you want, but question it in a bigger context. This is all I'm saying. Do you know what I do in the bedroom? I do stuff I question myself, so what? Why do people take it so goddamn personal when they're asked to think about what they do and prefer? Like I'm the dick police or something, lulz. We don't discover our preferences in a bubble, so why not confronting ourselves with it and where it may derive from? No one has to stop doing BDSM or whatever, just don't be all the time like "my choice, so it's necessarily cool".

[Danielle Ni Dhighe]

And it's not only about BDSM, it goes further to women being submissive, like in Shades of Grey, Twilight (to me, the nonsexual kind of SoG), in porn etc. In society, sexually all time available and submissive women are way more prevalent and desired than sexually dominant ones.
Now, see, I wouldn't consider that to be a "sex-negative" view. In fact, a lot of us "sex-positive" feminists would ask the same questions. But I think those questions can, and should, be asked without slipping into the "sex-negative" zone.


Why do we need this power exchange at all? Why do people get so aroused about it?I have experience within BDSM, and I couldn't tell you why I enjoy power exchange any more than I can tell you why I'm bisexual or why I prefer red-haired women. Is there an ideological component that would vanish under communism? Perhaps.


But yeah, come on, give me another "try to tell people what to do" posting.I was pointing out a problem with "sex-negative" in general. If you say you don't want to tell others what to do with their bodies, fair enough.

[Lily Briscoe]

Edit: responded to the wrong article, my bad.