Greer on Abortion and Sex.

[Monty Cantsin]

There can be no gainsaying that women connot manage their own lives if access to abortion is to be denied, but the need for abortion is itself the consequence of oppresion. The whole woman of reproductive ager produces an ovum a month, representing a single shot at pregnacy every twenty-eigt days. A man is constantly engaged in spermatogenesis, every hour of every day and night, and can release 400 million sperm at every ejaclation. A woman who maximized her reproductive potential could, if all her pregnacies proceeded to term, produce no more then thirty childern. A (young) man who had intercourse as often as possible with a different fertile woman each time could sire three or four childern a day. A man whose sperm was donated as often as he could manage to a sperm back could be the genetic father of literally thousands of childern. It can hardly be rational for a woman who does not desire pregancy to expose her cervix to hyperfertile seminal fluid when what she is seeking is not pregancy but sexual pleasure. A woman's pleasure is not dependent upon the presence of a penis in the vagina; neither is a man's. We must ask therefore why intromission is still, parhaps more then ever, described as normal or full intercourse. We have accepted that lesbians and gays who choose not to pleasure each other in this way have natural and normal relations. Only hetrosexuals are required to perform sex in an orthodox fashion, as if they were imitating the founding fathers and seeking to people the earth, when that is the last thing on their minds. The explanation seems to lie in the symbolic nature of intercourse as an act of domination.

Germaine Greer "The Whole Woman" page 89.

Comments?

[patrickbeverley]

Originally posted by Monty Cantsin@Apr 26 2006, 04:02 PM
The explanation seems to lie in the symbolic nature of intercourse as an act of domination.

I don't know, maybe people just like penetration.

Radical thought, I know.

[Black Dagger]

Monty, you should edit that for spelling/grammar!

I agree with Greer that heterosexual men tend to reduce the term 'sex' to mean just penetration, and that more emphasis should be placed on other forms of pleasure, such as oral, " A woman's pleasure is not dependent upon the presence of a penis in the vagina; neither is a man's" - for the greater benefit of everyone involved in heterosexual relationships. Her comments on penetrative sex as a symbolic of domination is to an extent true, i think there can be some symbolic truth to this with heterosexual men who place heavy emphasis on penetration and shy away from oral sex- but that could be just as much about their own selfishness as any subconscious urge to dominate their partners.

[Hegemonicretribution]

I am assuming, although I don't think unjustly, that people (mean at least) are genetically predetermined to have some sort of preference for penetrative sex. I may well be wrong, and I am not saying we can't overcome this, or that it even exists in a large majority of cases, but it would have made evolutionary sense in earlier times. Now it serves to disadvantage females who (in our society) are at greater risk during penetrative sex. This includes being at a higher risk of contracting STDs, as well as possibly finding themselves pregnant.

That aside, I think the view of sex as narrow, and other sexual acts seen as either perverse, suplementary, complimentary or laborious is counter-productive. I suppose I don't have to explain why "perverse" views are not a good thing, but the other views that see any other act as secondary, or less important do enforce hetropatriarchial views.

Personally I prefer mutual masturbation/oral sex in the most part, but there is a definite culture existing around the idea of going "the whole way." Sex education would be a good angle to approch this from, teen pregnancy rates could most likely be cut if children were encouraged to vent their sexual energy through less risky means, and to move on only when they can be responsible for their actions (in terms of protection, or supporting a prospective child).

It is hard to say this without implying that sex is bad, or even over-rated, what I mean is that other acts are currently under-rated, and that the result of this bias towards penetration causes problems predominantly for the female (as others have said).

[Dooga Aetrus Blackrazor]

He says that penetration is overrated? That has no relevance to his argument about denying abortion rights. He is just trying to argue that women are to blame for engaging in sex that makes them subservient, and, consequently, they are giving up their rights to not have a child. Furthermore, the idea that the penis penetrates the vagina as a form of dominance has nothing to do with how sex occurs. If we were matriarchal, the covering of the penis might symbol dominance. Finally, his argument also implies that there is something wrong with abortion itself, which he fails to justify.

[Hegemonicretribution]

Dooga Aetrus Blackrazor: I assume the comments were directed towards me.

If I came of in the way you impled then you are attacking my wording, not my actual position, because I meant no such thing and I think you are merely manipulated mt words to some weird ends.

Denying abortion rights? I think abortion rights are absolute. All I meant about male dominance occuring through penatrative sex is that a focus on penatrative sex in current society benifits the male more than the female. Nothing more, nothing less.

Something wrong with abortion? Unless a post has been deleted and this isn't addressed to me I think you have entirely missed what I tried to say. If I worded things wrong I am sorry, but I don't know that I did.

[Black Dagger]

Dooga Aetrus Blackrazor what are you talking about?

although I don't think unjustly, that people (mean at least) are genetically predetermined to have some sort of preference for penetrative sex.

I think this 'preference' has as much to do with the way sex education for men is conducted, and how sex is portrayed in society more generally (dominant sex culture), as it does with some sort of 'predetermined preference'. I mean, what about guys who preference other forms of sex over penetration? Or don't have penetrative sex at all?

but there is a definite culture existing around the idea of going "the whole way."

Exactly!

[Hegemonicretribution]

Originally posted by Black Dagger@Apr 27 2006, 04:51 AM
Dooga Aetrus Blackrazor what are you talking about?

I know! I don't know why he tried to paint me as a sexist there ...

I think this 'preference' has as much to do with the way sex education for men is conducted, and how sex is portrayed in society more generally (dominant sex culture), as it does with some sort of 'predetermined preference'.

I agree completely, I tried to make it come through in my post, although I had drank a few (unusual) so I may have not been up to par.

I mean, what about guys who preference other forms of sex over penetration? Or don't have penetrative sex at all?

Like me?

[TC]

Germaine Greer is a perfect example of an authoritarian anarchist.

She takes her own personal experiance tastes and perspective (which being a man-hating anti-social psychopath is an unusual one) and universializes them as if her view represented the one and only truth.

This is really the essense of social conservatism.


Greer doesn't make reasoned arguments she simply makes pronouncements based on her personal feelings which she takes to have some sort of universial truth.

We get it that Greer doesn't like hetero sex, and so what. The fact is that most women do and its pretty moronic of her to present herself as working for women's liberation when she wants to surpress most women's sexuality. Most women and most men's sexual pleasure in in fact dependent to an extent on sexual intercourse, which is not to say that they can't have lots of other types of sexual pleasure, but they want sex too, both for the physical and emotional sensation. Its retarded to claim that "pleasure is not depedent upon the presence of a penis in the vagina", because it misses the point, there are other ways to get off but having sex is satisfying in ways that other types of sexual activity are not and most people want that in addition to other types of sexual activity. While there are certaintly other ways of having 'pleasure' having sex gives a certain type of pleasure that most people want, and Greer is in no position to tell them that its inappropriate or that they can just 'do without it.'

I mean, you could make the same claim about partnered sex in general (you can masturbate right! sex partners aren't required for pleasure&#33 or, to piss off radical feminists, how about saying that a women's pleasure isn't depedent on having an orgasm (nor is a man's). Which just goes to show that, what Greer writes doesn't constitute a reasoned argument but rather personal feelings on a subject that she extrapolates to everyone else.


And the idea that consensual sex is an act of domination is not only totally absurd but profoundly insulting to heterosexuals. It degrades straight men to suggest that sex with an equal, consenting partner is an act of dominating them and it degrades straight women to suggest that sex is an act of submission on their part; it robs them of their ability to express their sexuality and sexual desires in a manner of their preference. Radical feminists are probably the only group of people who are typically "heterophobic"

Blackdagger writes

I agree with Greer that heterosexual men tend to reduce the term 'sex' to mean just penetration, and that more emphasis should be placed on other forms of pleasure, such as oral,

Thats because thats what the word "sex" means to heterosexual men and women, and i'll use the word that way because i don't think everyone should have to let some man-hating wacko define the language for them.

"Sex" means intercourse and its taken "more seriously" than other sexual activities by heterosexuals for completely sensible reasons: its messier, more involved, and potentially more dangerious. Most people have higher standards in terms of who they'll have sex with than who they'll do other things with...

And anyways i think straight men at this point are probably predominately concerned with their partner's pleasure. Nearly all couples who have sex also do oral and all of the other common heterosexual activities. Sex isn't intercourse but not foreplay, sex is foreplay plus intercourse.

Her comments on penetrative sex as a symbolic of domination is to an extent true, i think there can be some symbolic truth to this with heterosexual men who place heavy emphasis on penetration and shy away from oral sex- but that could be just as much about their own selfishness as any subconscious urge to dominate their partners.

If you want to claim that its "symbolically dominating" then you can only do so if you accept Greer's man-hating anti-heterosexual choice of symbolism, and virtually no one does. Heterosexual couples can have sex with the woman on top, if that symbolically dominating the man?

Um and, ulternative theory about why some straight guys might not want to go down on their partners: maybe they just don't like the taste...you know how some straight girls just don't like the taste either. Theres nothing selfish about not wanting to perform sex acts that you don't get off on, thats just not wanting to be exploited, and no one in a healthy relationship would want their partner to do something that wasn't good for both of them.

Hegemonicretribution writes

Sex education would be a good angle to approch this from, teen pregnancy rates could most likely be cut if children were encouraged to vent their sexual energy through less risky means, and to move on only when they can be responsible for their actions (in terms of protection, or supporting a prospective child).

Or you could just make birth control and condoms easily available, teach them how to use it and then let them decide what kindof sexual activity they want to engage in, and have easy access to abortions if they make a mistake, rather then trying to build up some kindof taboo around sex.

It is hard to say this without implying that sex is bad, or even over-rated, what I mean is that other acts are currently under-rated, and that the result of this bias towards penetration causes problems predominantly for the female (as others have said).

Realistically though, who actually has sex without fooling around in a bunch of other ways first and probably afterwards? I don't think anyone really does that in real life unless they're increadibly repressed.

Dooga Aetrus Blackrazor: I assume the comments were directed towards me.

actually, i think Dooga's comments were in response to Greer, who he thought was a man (which was frankly a totally understandable mistake given her authoritarian anti-sex attitude and desire to tell straight women what to do).

I mean...he couldn't have been refering to you because you didn't say anything about abortion.

or...maybe someone deleted a post.

[Hegemonicretribution]

Originally posted by TragicClown@Apr 27 2006, 07:54 PM
Or you could just make birth control and condoms easily available, teach them how to use it and then let them decide what kindof sexual activity they want to engage in, and have easy access to abortions if they make a mistake, rather then trying to build up some kindof taboo around sex.

I think you may have misunderstood, I tried to qualify this view in the next part of my post..

Realistically though, who actually has sex without fooling around in a bunch of other ways first and probably afterwards? I don't think anyone really does that in real life unless they're increadibly repressed.

There are plenty of men who rarely go in for foreplay other than felatio (by choice) in fact it is a stereotypically chauvinistic thing to do. Comedians comment on it, and so do some men (still). Then again I did have a girlfriend that was not into foreplay at all, come to think of it she only liked quickies... <_< I don&#39;t know what that says about me

actually, i think Dooga&#39;s comments were in response to Greer, who he thought was a man (which was frankly a totally understandable mistake given her authoritarian anti-sex attitude and desire to tell straight women what to do).

That makes sense... Sorry, I just assumed most people would be familiar with a name such as Greer Sorry Dooga, misunderstanding.

or...maybe someone deleted a post.

I didn&#39;t see anything logged.

[Dooga Aetrus Blackrazor]

I was referring to Greer, who I assumed was a man. I will try and be more careful next time, lol. Silly me.

[TC]

Originally posted by Dooga Aetrus Blackrazor@Apr 27 2006, 08:19 PM
I was referring to Greer, who I assumed was a man. I will try and be more careful next time, lol. Silly me.

lol

I think the fact that someone who wasn&#39;t familier with Greer would, when reading something she wrote, even though Germaine is much more common as a female name, simply assume that it must be written by a sexist male chauvinist, really speaks to what her attitudes and politics are like.