freedom from sexuality

[rioters bloc]

this is a post from the blog of a fellow anarchofeminist. i found it interesting, and was wondering what other people thought about the ideas she puts forth and how relevant they think it is.. since a large portion of revleft are male i'd also like to hear any thoughts about the increasing sexualisation of men as well [or if you even think it exists]

Freedom from Sexuality

On friday night, I was with a group at a pub. We were all talking anarchism, when a middle-aged guy who wasn’t an anarchist came up to talk about music and culture. Ok, cool. Then he stated that women were ‘more sexually free than men’ because women ‘can wear skirts, and heels’ and ‘dress sexily’ when they want to. Supposedly a man can’t. Well, ok, a heterosexual man might get bashed if he wears high heels under his cargo pants, and that would suck. But men do dress sexily - they do it all the time in the queer scene, and in the transgender scene, and in the mixed-sexuality diy stripping scene. Straight men dress sexily when they want to attract and impress women. I feel sorry for men who feel that they need to dress from the Lowes and Elliots all-nylon range, but dagginess in male dress doesn’t equal sexual freedom for women.

“Slut, ho, whore, unclean *****” were all nice words I remember from my pre-sexual days. Why does a 10 year old girl get called a “slurry” when she doesn’t even have sex? This was the first clue in my life that men use sexuality to dominate women. I had never had sex, yet I was called a “slut” for expressing my thoughts opinions. My sexuality would always be available for others to judge me on. If I had sex with men (or even a man), I would be a whore. If I didn’t I would be a “prude”. If I had sex with women, I would be a “shame”, or a “waste”. If I display sexually by wearing lipsitck and going on a diet, then I might be “hot”, or “alright”. And I’ve got large breasts, so my face doesn’t matter so much to some. But if I let myself get fat, or am in fact unattractive - I’d be a “dog”. Given that I am surrounded by images of beautiful, sexual women who don’t look like me, I believe that I’m a “dog”. So yeah, given the options, a woman might chose to display, and dress sexily, to invite all others to look and maybe to touch. She might feel her sexual power of attraction and selection and mistake this for a real power. But sexual power ends at satiation. If she doesn’t fuck, a woman becomes a “prick tease”. The ‘damned if you do, damned if you don’t’ dilemma that women face is actually a continuing plane of oppression that women are daily lashed to by media, by men’s attitudes to women, and by womens attitudes to other women and their attitude to themselves.

Women are pitted against each other in the sexual arena (a very sexy-sounding thing, but an ugly reality). The hierarchy of attractiveness is a complex sum based on age, quality of visage, fatness, and willingness to sexually display. This hierarchy is increasingly commodified and women are also judged on their style and brand of clothes, makeup, shoes, purses and haircut. Who hasn’t got one of those ugly fake Gucci bags? Everyone knows they’re fake and ugly, but carry them for the status they might attach. Supposedly alternative images of womens’ sexuality as found on Suicide Girls is nothing more than a tattooed re-invention of pandering to male fantasy about women. Just look at the comments attached to the SG podcast (”Good stuff. I just can’t wait till they start video casting”) (my emphasis). The sleek and pretty things who parade on SG do nothing but add another layer of curiosity to the sexual performance that is a woman’s daily life.

Women use sexuality against each other. Women enforce the sexual mores of the time - by disciplining other women who don’t meet the standard. And by comparing themselves to each other in order of attractiveness or achievement. The bible story of “Rachael and Leah” is still a current example - two women compete to outbreed each other; breeding becomes the marker of their success as women. Today women size each other up according to waist line, breast size, prettiness and willingness to conform. If you don’t understand, try not shaving your armpits, or talking about menstrual blood to your galpals - are they into it, or are they disgusted? Cleo and Cosmo say they’re meant to be disgusted. Though once upon a time, only “whores” would shave their pits, today its mandatory.

It doesn’t matter who is enforcing the sexual oppression of women. The gender of the oppressor might lead to a feeling of being betrayed by ‘the sisterhood’, but is not material to the fact of oppression. The fact is that women are tied to their sexuality for better or for worse.

This is the key to the ‘women have more sexual freedom’ mythology. A woman does not have sexual freedom until she has freedom from being sexualised, either positively or negatively.

[Creature]

I completely agree to be honest.

But also, women look at men and rate them if they're, 'hot' or 'ugly, loser, etc'.

I personaly think that there is oppression on both ends of the scale. Just under different circumstances.

It reminds me of a article by an Anarcho-feminist talking about marriage. Where the social pressure ot marry a respecatable husband with money and to reproduce interferes with the girl actually marrying for love. Then as she grows older, she becomes more and more opressed, and becomes bitter and then the marriage disintegrates.

But yes, she is right. I have noticed that in everyday life. It used to puzzle m why other had not, until I learned about Anarchy.

[Bannockburn]

She is right, completely. Foucault in history of sexuality vol 1, actually states the beginning mechanism of controlling, producing, and reproducing sexuality beginning with language during the 18th century. Outside of that, women have been, as she rightly states, disciplined to a ultra-sexualized physiological body. Its not hard to see the transitions of female bodies throughout the centuries. If one does one's homework, then you can easily see it. Nevertheless, because this has an enormous economic benefit, men have for a long time been outside the market to be exploited, controlled, disciplined and engineered. So, to add on to what she was saying, that women further reproduce other women accordingly, men as well are reproducing other men accordingly. But this has much much more at stake than simply the engineering of bodies. It has to do, going back to Foucault, with bio-power. It has to do with power's control of life itself. What is acceptable, what should be marginalized. How does what reproduce, with whom, who doesn't reproduce. For example, the control of women's bodies through birth control. The scientific control and knowledge that categorizes a healthy and none healthy body. The species of human, been fictitiously sub-categorized as “races” and thus the “biological difference” of race fragment humanity for manipulation and control, and thus what is deemed as “acceptable” relations. She's completely right, but she's only scratching the surfac

[Le People]

I am in agreeance of why a hetrosexual man can't dress in a femine manner. I know of a male teacher who is straight (his girlfriend vistis on his lunch break) but he wears flamboyant clothes, shaves his legs and does splits. Even myself has been accussed of dandyism. I don't care, for I relate with the girls better as a dandy than a male chauvanistic pig. When accussed of dandyism, I recite the feats of Robespeirre.

[Rockfan]

When you think about it the same thing has happened to all minoritys. For example, in the past a black man would not appear on an billboard or flyer therefore they would want to be white ( or at leased envy what whites had) and do the same as woman do today in terms of self-improvement. I guess with woman it's slightly different because the oppression still goes on but the freedomes of minoritys are somewhat greater than in the past yet not equal to whites. But I do totally agree thats why I try and explain it to any girl who say to me there not pritty or whatever, even if I don't find then attractive I just then you won't every think your anything if you buy into the crap.

[rioters bloc]

it's something that i don't think i really have a strong opinion on, as of yet. depending on the situation i switch sides. sometimes i think, what's wrong with wanting to dress 'sexily' and flash heaps of skin in the middle of winter if that's what [i]you[/b] want [rather than because you think it will attract men/womyn to you], and on the other hand i think, well why would i want to if not to appear attractive and thus asking people who i don't know to pretty much just judge me on how i look?

for example: i don't really wear overly revealing clothing [partly cos i'm self-conscious about my body - that's the other thing, doesn't being able to 'flaunt it' mean that you're comfortable with your body and who you are?] and one day i wore a fairly low cut top and my bf said, as soon as he saw me, "why are you dressed funny?!" i was pretty offended. and when queried basically he said, "oh it's just that your top is so low cut". i got even more offended and said, "what you're going to dictate what i wear now?" to which he replied, "no, i just don't want you to think you have to show off your body for me or anyone else". which was a fair call. but the thing is, that he often speaks of womyn as being hot or having hot bodies and he checks out womyn sometimes, quite overtly too, so its completely hypocritical. and i called him out on it straight away, and said "i think the reason you feel uncomfortable is because if i weren't your gf, you would be perving on as well, and you know that that's what other men will be doing which is why you want me to cover up. so rather than the blame being on you for objectifying womyn and perving on them, you're blaming me for 'tricking' men into perving on me. similar to the 'let's blame the rape victim' scenario [although on a much, much smaller scale obviously]

anyway i was very angry and vocal about it and i think he felt bad afterwards. truth is though that i myself don't even know how i feel about it; a small part of me feels that i do wear that top because i want to be considered 'attractive'.in which case i'm even a bigger hypocrite than him. argh.

[TheComrade]

I agree with this - women get called sluts, men get called studs - I mean what the hell??? I have female friends that talk about periods, tampons, 'pains,' underwear etc to each other (even when I'm around) They even grab hold of each other breasts and say they are giving each other 'erections' - they mostly get called lesibians but one is probably the most fancied person in the school (on the good side anyway.)

Men are also supressed however - but as has been said, to a lesser extent. If you stand inbetween two men on a line of urinals thats considered 'bad' (your supposed to leave a gap of a minimum of 1 unirnal between each man!!)

What do Communists, Anarchists and Socialists feel about this in relation to the politics?

[drain.you]

Hmmm...I like this kind of thread, suppose because it leans towards sociology in many ways.

I think women are controlled by sexuality like described above. I think everyone is influneced by society more than they think for themselves, for instance I noticed at college that the majority of people (who I tend not to associate with) all dress in the same kind of clothes in order to 'fit in', I suppose I do the same to 'fit in' with my own social group however I'm classed as an outcast to the majority due to wearing baggy clothes, listening to rock music and even considering leftwing politics as a possible way to organise government and society. That illustrates how society controls what we wear in order to conform but its exactly the same for sexuality. Womyn are taught what is right and what is wrong and they conform in order to fit in, though not everyone conforms, the majority of people will. There are subcultures of girls that act outside of the norm, the same for men regarding subcultures.
Over all I would say womyn have less sexual freedom.
Why? Well step back and have a look.
Women until recently* have been regarded as men's property (also up until recently*, which I was ashamed to discover, a husband could legally rape his wife as it was seen that a man owns a womyn after marriage). These beliefs, though seen as 'wrong' now (supposably) will be around for a while and will not just change straight away.
Men see womyn still as sex objects. Fact. I don't know how long it will be around, a long time I imagine. Its a nasty circle in my opinion. The womyn must conform to the expectations of being 'up for it' and 'available' but not a 'slut' in order to be accepted and also must compete with each other, giving men a wide selection of womyn to choose from, because they will compete and show that they are sexually available, this reinforces the 'sex object' view, they will reproduce perhaps and their children will be given the same values.

A change for the future, perhaps? Well with womyn gaining more rights and starting to draw equal to men (though a long way off) there will hopefully be a time when both genders have the same amount of sexual freedom. With womyn no longer having to rely on men's money (the idea i think mentioned before, that womyn were expected to marry a well off man rather than for love) due to the more recent feminist movements and praise in popular media of 'independent womyn'.

Yeah sure, men get it too. Its because of the competition for partners I guess, however men look for different things in womyn than womyn look for in men, yes? Justified by the higher sex drive thing, men want sex, they want to see flesh, small outfits, tight tops, etc. I can't tell you what womyn want but I wouldn't say its the same. Womyn in order to find a partner must be what men want them to be and vice versa however men's expectations limits a womin's sexual freedom more. Or so I see it.

*When I say recently I mean over the past 50years or so

[FleasTheLemur]

http://i29.photobucket.com/albums/c296/FleasTheLemur/Majorproblem.jpg

[our_mutual_friend]

This is the kind of thing that is a problem. Women and men are constantly worrying about whether that peron is 'checking them out' and what the people around them think about them. It's sad. I know, I do it too. The thing is do these people's opinons really matter? Its is a waste of time to waste words like 'slut' and 'whore' on people. What people get up to is up to them really. Its kind of sad that people are judged so much on these kind of things and focus on whether that girl's top is low enough or his jeans are too tight. What's ridiculous is that if a guy wears tight jeans the word 'gay' crosses your mind, even if its not his choice to wear something tight. Too much pressure on looks and fashion.
Fashions change too - corsets were to give women tiny wastes and Chinese footbinding for those sexy small feet :blink:

Yay for openess of speech and openess of mind - what the hell does it all matter really?

[bcbm]

Interesting topic. I advise everyone to see the latest version of the film "Killing me softly." It uses advertisements to essentially show the oppression that continues to be directed against women. Even shelving magazines at work, its disgusting to see the kind of images that are being promoted about women. There is clearly quite a bit of sexualization there, and many catch-22's.

I think right now we're in a period of reaction against many of the gains made during the Women's Liberation movement of the 70's. This can be seen in anti-abortion activism, primarily, although its also somewhat prevalent in the general culture (remember "The Man Show?"). Not to say Women's Lib gained too much: obviously society's views didn't change that much since we're still dealing with many of the same problems.

What's worrying to me now is that the sexualization of women, particularly in the media, is also being extended to men. Much as the ads featuring women reinforce certain stereotypes (youth, slender, innocent but also not, easy, quiet, passive, etc), the ads featuring men serve the same purpose (young, muscular, aggressive, outgoing, etc). I think we need to be challenging all of the images being directed at us and seriously start re-evaluating our own perceptions of other people. I think more concentrated and organized efforts to destroy conventual sexuality and gender ideas needs to be undertaken, and this time we can't settle for merely being accepted into bourgeois society.

That's my 2 cents.