Mon 4th Aug - AWOL monthly mtg & discussion: "Sex Positive" vs "Sex Negative" Feminism?

[nfnm...@riseup.net]

This Monday 4th August (1st Monday each month) is our next AWOL organising
meeting 7pm (women only) & feminist discussion from 8pm (all welcome) - at
Next To Nowhere social centre, basement of 96 Bold St (entrance next door
to News From Nowhere Bookshop, ring white bell. If you can't manage the
stairsm there is a lift, that will hold a person in a wheelchair but not
an additional person).

This month's discussion topic: "Sex Positive" vs "Sex Negative" Feminism?

The aim of the discussion is to critically explore this binary opposition
that is often present within feminist discourse, not to decide on one
versus the other!

Sex positivity is what it sounds like: being positive and accepting about
sex and sexuality, rather than negative, moralising or shaming, and
awareness raising so that people have all the information they need about
sexual health, about sexual empowerment, consent, sexual communication
etc. It is essentially a good thing, and serves to undermine harmful
patriarchal and heteronormative narratives about sex and sexuality.

For example, here is the Brook sexual health clinics' Be Sex Positive
campaign:
http://www.brook.org.uk/index.php/be-sex-positive

However, in feminism "sex positive" can often be a loaded and problematic
term, mainly because is often used to differentiate and distance oneself
from the politics and opinions of other feminists that one perceives as,
either explicitly or by implication, "sex negative", "prudish", "anti-sex"
or similar. The "sex negative" feminists are often characterised as
irrationally judgmental, as wanting to police the sex lives of others, and
it may be implied that they have personal sexual hang-ups and are not as
enlightened/liberated as the sex-positive-identifying person
talking/writing about them. In turn, feminists who are dismissed as "sex
negative" in such discussions get exasperated with the "sex pozzies". This
binary is often deployed in feminist disagreements on the sex industry and
other contentious topics like BDSM, or even the politics of women's sexual
relationships with men, (all issues where fundamentally opposing positions
can be taken that are both held to be feminist, because of different
perspectives on questions of women's sexual choices and agency). In these
debates moving beyond "sex positive" vs "sex negative" won't magically
resolve disagreements or produce common ground, but will get rid of a
really unhelpful derailing tactic.

A broad problem with "sex positive feminism" is when it simplistically
celebrates and advocates for women's sexual liberation and empowerment
without recognising that sex is frequently not a positive experience for
women and girls, but is experienced as coercion, abuse and violence, that
sex cannot be uncomplicatedly separated out from questions of power and
oppression. A woman's personal journey of sexual self-discovery and
reclamation, becoming confident in her sexual life, overcoming negative
messages and experiences around sex, and so on, is all a good thing, but
it can't be generalised to all other women. At worst, "sex positivity" can
be a belief that being sexually confident, adventurous and unconventional
is something to push people into wanting, or to judge them for not
wanting. Finally, we should question the assumption that sex and being
sexual is by default something that people want - there is a growing
awareness of the need to non-judgementally acknowledge and support
individual's not being or wanting to be sexual, for whatever reason
(asexuality/not interested in sex, recovery from sexual trauma, decision
to be celibate), as valid choices or feelings.

These two articles describe why "sex positive" can be problematic:

Why I’m Not Here for Sex-Positivity without Critical Analysis -
"Sex-positivity is a movement that arose from a need for us to accept and
value sexuality without guilt, shame, and hurt. I’m about that. But when
we stop asking hard questions in favor of assuming that everything is
revolutionarily enlightened and therefore devoid of the intricacies of
oppressive structures, I have to step back and question whether or not
that’s a movement I want to be a part of."
http://everydayfeminism.com/2014/05/sex-positivity-critical-analysis/

"Sexy Feminism" vs Sexism: Debating Sex Positive Feminism - "Sex has been
a tool wielded against women for so long, it could make a person rather
desperate to get a turn to use it as an instrument of empowerment instead.
I mean, women have been sexualized to death - doesn’t it just make you
want to finally have your own say about sexualization and sexuality,
regardless of everyone else’s rules? BUT - and you knew this was coming -
the idea that you can just get out of the culture of sexual
objectification and sexist exploitation like climbing out of a pool
doesn’t sit well with me."
http://thebodyisnotanapology.tumblr.com/post/65848643174/sexy-feminism-vs-sexism-debating-sex-positive


Lisa Milbank, who writes the A Radical Transfeminist blog, has written
several brilliant but very long pieces that explore in great depth the
limitations of sex positivity and what arguments that are dismissed as
"sex negative" are actually trying to get at.

The Ethical Prude: Imagining An Authentic Sex-Negative Feminism - "... it
is both progressive and radical to say that sex is not shameful for women,
and that a woman should not be punished for her sexual choices; radical,
because shaming and punishment are both commonplace. But in the present
day it is not radical to say that 'sex is nice'. If anything, it’s
tautological. Sex, for all practical purposes, is defined much of the time
as only 'that which is nice' - in many feminist discourses, if it is not
nice, it is not sex. This precludes certain ways of thinking about sex. I
would like to look at the things we are able to think when we allow
ourselves to criticise not just singular sex acts but the ‘niceness’ of
sex under patriarchy as a whole."
http://radtransfem.wordpress.com/2012/02/29/the-ethical-prude-imagining-an-authentic-sex-negative-feminism/

The Prude's Progress Part 1 (with links to the whole series of articles) -
"This series of articles is an attempt to answer the question: if
sexuality under patriarchy is such a mess, what might 'less of a mess'
look like, and how do we get there from here?"
http://radtransfem.wordpress.com/2012/11/14/the-prudes-progress-part-i/

Here's a short article draws on and summarises the arguments in The
Ethical Prude essay, and also critiques sex positivity from an asexual
perspective:

Sex-Positivity, Compulsory Sexuality and Intersecting Identities
http://alifeunexamined.wordpress.com/2012/06/27/sex-positivity-compulsory-sexuality-and-intersecting-identities/


Here's a piece from I Blame The Patriarchy summarising a 1994 essay by
bell hooks questioning the meaning of sexual liberation for women

*NOTE* *there is a close-up photo of a spider at top of this article*
Women’s Sexuality 2.0 - "[bell hooks] identifies funfeminism as a
commodity sold to a public made queasy by the thought of a sexual dynamic
that doesn’t fetishize oppression. It is 'being brought to us as a product
that works effectively to set women against one another, to engage us in
competition wars over which brand of feminism is more effective.' ...
Envisioning new, exciting, liberatory, fun sex is tough. When gazing
beyond the suffocating perimeter of this oppressive patriarchy set-up -
which set-up inflicts derision, violence, and loneliness on those who
resist it - enlightenment and liberation are but mirages shimmering on a
desert horizon."
http://blog.iblamethepatriarchy.com/2009/02/07/womens-sexuality-20/


Here's a great piece by Breanne Fahs, who coincidentally is also the
author of the Valeries Solanas autobiography we talked about last time:

On "Liberated Sex" and Other Myths - "As sexual beings, women personally
and collectively face this contradictory reality on a near daily basis -
we are freer than we feel, freer than the toxic garbage dump in our heads
and on our television screens would suggest, freer still to imagine
something new. At the same time, we must keep a keen and watchful eye on
the ways sexuality gets distorted and used against women’s agency,
empowerment, and liberty. Sitting uncomfortably between these positions,
we can continue to do the hard work of undoing and remaking our realities,
both as individuals and as a collective."
http://thefeministwire.com/2012/04/on-liberated-sex-and-other-myths/


RELATED READING (basically, other stuff that occurred to me to be relevant)

Here's a varied bunch of links about both the politics of the words "slut"
and/or "prude", and how those two concepts shape girl's and women's
relationships to sex and their sexual selves:

"The accusation of prude or slut often had the effect of silencing us -
keeping us quiet about the truth of our sexual history, whether virgins or
experienced; making it more difficult to say no to sex that we didn’t
really want, or in some cases, making us go along with a man’s sexual
desires because it seemed easier than putting up a fight. Once called a
slut, we found ourselves more secretive and distrustful. The slut/prude
divide pits women against each other and keeps us from comparing notes and
experiences." (from the first link)

http://www.womensliberation.org/priorities/feminist-consciousness-raising/127-sluts-prudes-what-s-behind-it
http://thecurvature.com/2007/12/11/prude-or-slut-were-asking-the-wrong-question/
http://culturesofengagement.wordpress.drake.edu/2013/09/30/prude-vs-slut/
http://www.theeighty8.com/uncategorized/5-ways-you-can-stop-slut-shaming-today/
http://www.blackwomensblueprint.org/2011/09/23/an-open-letter-from-black-women-to-the-slutwalk/
http://www.newstatesman.com/music-and-performance/2013/10/miley-cyrus-complex-ontology-slut-shaming


It's important to remember that conflict over what sexual liberation
should consist of for women and what that should mean in our personal
lives and in our political lives is not a new thing. Feminists have
grappled with these contradictions over and over, whether collectively or
in each of our own heads and hearts, over many different sexual issues.
For example:

Here's the Wikipedia page about the feminist or lesbian "sex wars" of the
1970s and 1980s - probably not the best or most insightful source, but
gives a good overview:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lesbian_sex_wars


The question of sexual liberation is part of what started modern feminism.
Ideals of sexual freedom and rejection of traditional sexual morals were
part and parcel of radical movements of the 1960s and 70s in the USA, but
women broke away from those movements because of the sexism and sexual
exploitation they experienced there.

"Part of being a woman was this psychology of proving I was such a good
radical, 'better than the men.' We felt we were motivated by something
higher because we didn't have to go to war ourselves. Most guys didn't
take women seriously, however. They were things to fuck . . . You went
through this intense experience [at demonstrations], and you went back and
had sex.[But] It [sex] was much more on men's terms"
Margery Tabankin, who was an antiwar activist student in the 1960s, quoted
in Antiwar Activism and Emerging Feminism in the Late 1960s: The Times
They Were A'Changing http://www.solidarity-us.org/site/node/1681

"Men celebrated our sexual liberation - our willingness to freely give and
enjoy blow jobs and group sex, our willingness to experiment with anal
penetration - but ultimately many males revolted when we stated that our
bodies were territories that they could not occupy at will. Men who were
ready for female sexual liberation if it meant free pussy, no strings
attached, were rarely ready for feminist female sexual agency. This agency
gave us the right to say yes to sex, but it also empowered us to say no."
bell hooks in Communion: The Female Search for Love - quoted in:
http://anagnori.tumblr.com/post/71280121184/men-celebrated-our-sexual-liberation-our

"Weathermen had required for its 'security' that a new woman coming into
the group had to sleep with every man in the group" - from short video
clip (1 min) of Robin Morgan - Girls Say Yes To Boys Who Say "No"
http://www.makers.com/robin-morgan/moments/girls-say-yes-boys-who-say-no
(The Weathermen were an underground militant group - short history:
http://www.pbs.org/independentlens/weatherunderground/movement.html )

Note - the next clip in the series will start automatically. The others in
the series relevant to our topic are:
http://www.makers.com/robin-morgan/moments/naming-names
http://www.makers.com/robin-morgan/moments/sexism-60s-left
http://www.makers.com/robin-morgan/moments/real-sexual-revolution-women
(all a minute or less, and again, the next clips play automatically, but
these aren't all right after one another)

And through one of those clips I learned about Robin Morgan's
magnificently angry rant "Goodbye To All That", written in 1970 for the
women's takeover issue of a left newspaper, in which she calls out the
sexism of male activists and male-dominated groups by name.
"Goodbye to Hip culture and the so-called Sexual Revolution, which has
functioned toward women’s freedom as did the Reconstruction toward former
slaves - reinstituting oppression by another name. Goodbye to the
assumption that Hugh Romney is safe in his "cultural revolution," safe
enough to refer to "our women, who make all our clothes" without somebody
not forgiving that. Goodbye to the arrogance of power indeed that lets
Czar Stan Freeman of the Electric Circus sleep without fear at night, or
permits Tomi Ungerer to walk unafraid in the street after executing the
drawings for the Circus advertising campaign against women. Goodbye to the
idea that Hugh Hefner is groovy ‘cause he lets Conspirators come to
parties at the Playboy Mansion - goodbye to Hefner’s dream of a ripe old
age. Goodbye to Tuli and the Fugs and all the boys in the front room - who
always knew they hated the women they loved. Goodbye to the notion that
good ol’ Abbie is any different from any other up-and-coming movie star
who ditches the first wife and kids, good enough for the old days but
awkward once you’re Making It. Goodbye to his hypocritical double standard
that reeks through the tattered charm. Goodbye to lovely "pro-Women’s
Liberationist" Paul Krassner, with all his astonished anger that women
have lost their sense of humor "on this issue" and don’t laugh any more at
little funnies that degrade and hurt them: "
http://blog.fair-use.org/2007/09/29/goodbye-to-all-that-by-robin-morgan-1970/


Finally, the late, great, much-maligned Andrea Dworkin is often perceived
as the ultimate "sex negative" feminist. Here she is answering the
question of whether in her book Intercourse she was really saying "all sex
is rape" (as many people accuse her of):
"No, I wasn't saying that and I didn't say that, then or ever. There is a
long section in Right-Wing Women on intercourse in marriage. My point was
that as long as the law allows statutory exemption for a husband from rape
charges, no married woman has legal protection from rape. I also argued,
based on a reading of our laws, that marriage mandated intercourse--it was
compulsory, part of the marriage contract. Under the circumstances, I
said, it was impossible to view sexual intercourse in marriage as the free
act of a free woman. I said that when we look at sexual liberation and the
law, we need to look not only at which sexual acts are forbidden, but
which are compelled. The whole issue of intercourse as this culture's
penultimate expression of male dominance became more and more interesting
to me. In Intercourse I decided to approach the subject as a social
practice, material reality. This may be my history, but I think the social
explanation of the 'all sex is rape' slander is different and probably
simple. Most men and a good number of women experience sexual pleasure in
inequality. Since the paradigm for sex has been one of conquest,
possession, and violation, I think many men believe they need an unfair
advantage, which at its extreme would be called rape. I don't think they
need it. I think both intercourse and sexual pleasure can and will survive
equality."
http://www.nostatusquo.com/ACLU/dworkin/MoorcockInterview.html

Here's a detailed summary/review of Intercourse
http://www.isiswomen.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=547:intercourse-by-andrea-dworkin&catid=133&Itemid=201