lily1988 Posted May 19, 2015 Share Posted May 19, 2015 "Sex" being equated with PIV is male centric, cis sexist, and homophobic. https://whitevalkyrie.wordpress.com/2012/02/03/hello-world/ https://mscitrus.wordpress.com/2010/08/23/women-holes/ Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Posted May 19, 2015 Share Posted May 19, 2015 ...well, duh? Not sure what the news is here. Link to post Share on other sites
Rising Sun Posted May 19, 2015 Share Posted May 19, 2015 Yes and no. The fact is that PIV is the most ancient kind of sex, biologically speaking, and that it's by far the most effective way to conceive a baby. So it's normal that ehen people think "sex", they spontaneously tend to think "PIV" first. But of course, most people give too much importance to PIV sex, which is obviously overrated. We've evolved and sex has acquired a very important social meaning, far beyond reproduction. About the two links, I didn't read them entirely because the authors seem motivated by showing some crazy anger against all men rather than by demonstrating something in a reasonable way. If they want to be angry against something that considers women as walking vaginas, they can attack mainstream porn. Link to post Share on other sites
Mioav Posted May 19, 2015 Share Posted May 19, 2015 As a male myself, reading this is the exact reason I can never have sex, sticking something into a hole? Just looks and feels wrong, if anything its something you'll see in a horror movie, and yet most schools practice that as the preferred sexual method which is really concerning, and lets not get started on the media. Link to post Share on other sites
allrightalready Posted May 19, 2015 Share Posted May 19, 2015 i don't even need to read the links to agree with the OP Link to post Share on other sites
lily1988 Posted May 19, 2015 Author Share Posted May 19, 2015 Other sex practices are just as ancient. And having babies is not the only purpose for sexual activity. Link to post Share on other sites
Rising Sun Posted May 19, 2015 Share Posted May 19, 2015 Other sex practices are just as ancient. And having babies is not the only purpose for sexual activity.My post was talking about primitive animals and saying that we evolved since that. Read my post again. Link to post Share on other sites
Wyrmcraft Posted May 20, 2015 Share Posted May 20, 2015 Its really not male centered, it is certainly not cis sexist because those are the wrong words, and it is by no means homophobic. Culture may be male centered,, trans sexist, and homophobic but the fact that sex and PIV is the default context for that word certainly isn't. When my gay friend tells me he had sex, I go "That's nice" and I assume he has had some form of gay sex. My gay friend does not need to tell me he had gay sex, because that is assumed. When he says he had sex, I do not go "lol with a woma@n11!" because I'm not a bloody moron. Trans people can have PIV, and the second bloody article (even if that one felt disgusting to have on my browser history) stated that she had a FTM boyfriend who got a rubber dick and had PIV. There you go, no longer trans sexist. Trans people can have PIV too, or they cannot. Who cares? I don't. If they choose not to then there are all kinds of other types of sex they could have or not have as they care to. Also, some women happen to like PIV. If they don't, then they don't need to do it unless they are compromising with their husbands, or wives, or FTM/MTF/whatever I'm sick of covering people. The point is that communication and compromise are the most important parts of a relationship and that is universal, not just related to the supposed evils of PIV sex. What I'm saying is, use less harsh language when you describe things or you're going to sound like you came out of the black depths of extreme feminism that is tumblr and that is going to piss me off enough to rant and ramble some more because I will get myself modded to prevent AVEN from becoming like that horid thing. Link to post Share on other sites
lily1988 Posted May 20, 2015 Author Share Posted May 20, 2015 What's wrong with extreme feminism? It is fighting extreme patriarchy after all. Link to post Share on other sites
allrightalready Posted May 20, 2015 Share Posted May 20, 2015 i think radical feminism is a good thing just so long as it is not exclusionary. the only way we are ever going to get to be considered as equal partners in the social structure is to tear down all kyriarchies Link to post Share on other sites
Rising Sun Posted May 20, 2015 Share Posted May 20, 2015 What's wrong with extreme feminism? It is fighting extreme patriarchy after all.It's fighting men instead of the real societal problems. Link to post Share on other sites
Tarfeather Posted May 20, 2015 Share Posted May 20, 2015 What's wrong with extreme feminism? It is fighting extreme patriarchy after all. Hahah, good one. :) Link to post Share on other sites
Wyrmcraft Posted May 20, 2015 Share Posted May 20, 2015 Extremism in any form is bad. Given the state of the world I would think that is obvious. Link to post Share on other sites
zoidberger Posted May 20, 2015 Share Posted May 20, 2015 I've always thought of the word sex as a simple word to describe some form of sexual activity. As Wyrmcraft mentioned, if a gay friend mentions they had sex, I think they probably had gay sex. I don't think there's anything wrong with a default provided other types of sex aren't off the table because of penis/vagina penetrative sex being that default. When you think of marriage, the default is a hetero couple but that's not always the case, it's quite dependent upon who is involved. This seems like a subject that's blown out of the water. Link to post Share on other sites
Tarfeather Posted May 20, 2015 Share Posted May 20, 2015 Extremism in any form is bad. Given the state of the world I would think that is obvious. To be fair, that depends on your definition of extremism. What if you're being oppressed and enslaved through the threat of force? Sometimes violence may be necessary and effective. It is hard to judge when violence is justified, though. Chomsky makes some good points, for instance he argues it is not justified if all other alternatives have not been exhausted. Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Posted May 20, 2015 Share Posted May 20, 2015 What the hell is gay sex? Link to post Share on other sites
KendraPM Posted May 20, 2015 Share Posted May 20, 2015 What's wrong with extreme feminism? It is fighting extreme patriarchy after all.It's fighting men instead of the real societal problems. Technically that's misandry, although many misandristic people claim to be feminist and give the rest a bad name. Not trying to be nit-picky, but it's become a thing lately where people keep trying to claim feminists are misandristic, when in reality feminisim fights for the equality of the sexes (reguardless if that sex is male or female), not the oppression/hatred of men, and it gets me when people take a positive word and try and give it a bad meaning. Link to post Share on other sites
Rising Sun Posted May 20, 2015 Share Posted May 20, 2015 I agree with you, but sadly those persons are often called feminists by people even though they're actually sexist. Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Posted May 20, 2015 Share Posted May 20, 2015 Didn't read the links. But, yeah, of course considering the only sex to count as PiV is a lot of things and most of them bad. Link to post Share on other sites
zoidberger Posted May 20, 2015 Share Posted May 20, 2015 What the hell is gay sex? If you read the rest of the thread you'd realize in that context it meant sex between two (or possibly more) gay people as opposed to thinking it meant strictly penis in vagina (or hetero) sex. My point was that sex uses the people involved as a qualifier and thus every time someone says sex it doesn't automatically mean PIV sex. Link to post Share on other sites
Mostly Peaceful Ryan Posted May 20, 2015 Share Posted May 20, 2015 Those links are really bloody stupid. I'm not denying that they make some reasonable points, but they read like hateful diatribes. I agree those links were a painful read. Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Posted May 20, 2015 Share Posted May 20, 2015 What the hell is gay sex? If you read the rest of the thread you'd realize in that context it meant sex between two (or possibly more) gay people as opposed to thinking it meant strictly penis in vagina (or hetero) sex. My point was that sex uses the people involved as a qualifier and thus every time someone says sex it doesn't automatically mean PIV sex. I've read the thread. I just don't know how gay sex is different from sex. I've yet to hop into bed and say to myself "yeehaw, let's have me some gay sex." Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Posted May 20, 2015 Share Posted May 20, 2015 What intention? I don't see how it relates. Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Posted May 21, 2015 Share Posted May 21, 2015 What the hell is gay sex? If you read the rest of the thread you'd realize in that context it meant sex between two (or possibly more) gay people as opposed to thinking it meant strictly penis in vagina (or hetero) sex. My point was that sex uses the people involved as a qualifier and thus every time someone says sex it doesn't automatically mean PIV sex. I've read the thread. I just don't know how gay sex is different from sex. I've yet to hop into bed and say to myself "yeehaw, let's have me some gay sex." Oh come on Skulls. Since you're a woman, gay sex clearly cannot involve a penis for you. Ever. Anatomically impossible, not an option. If you were a guy, it could not involve a vagina. Ever. Anatomically impossible, not an option. So, gay sex =/= straight sex. This obviously doesn't invalidate that both are forms of sex (which the OP correctly criticizes - PIV worship does invalidate gay sex as "not actually real sex", which, per def, makes it a symptom of homophobia.) You implicitly do make the decision to have gay sex, and specifically gay sex and not straight sex, when you go to bed with a woman instead of a man (and vice versa, too), even if you don't say these specific words in your head. And yes, there are people - like myself - for whom the anatomy involved makes a world of difference. Straight sex is usually icky; male gay sex is pretty much always icky; Lesbian sex can be icky, but very often isn't. Involvement or not of one or more penises (which are icky, in case that's not obvious :P) is a pretty major key. Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Posted May 21, 2015 Share Posted May 21, 2015 Meh, I disagree. Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Posted May 21, 2015 Share Posted May 21, 2015 Meh, I disagree. With the last part (well duh, I know you don't share my penis repulsion... which is good for you [/sincerity mode] ), or with everything? Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Posted May 21, 2015 Share Posted May 21, 2015 Meh, I disagree. With the last part (well duh, I know you don't share my penis repulsion... which is good for you [/sincerity mode] ), or with everything? I just don't feel like getting into it all... but basically I think calling it gay sex has nothing to do with the activity... two heterosexuals can have oral sex, or anal sex, etc, and they do. I don't understand why Molly and Jim are having sex, but Molly and Sara are having "gay sex", when they're doing the exact same thing. You're labeling the actors, not the action. Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Posted May 21, 2015 Share Posted May 21, 2015 Meh, I disagree. With the last part (well duh, I know you don't share my penis repulsion... which is good for you [/sincerity mode] ), or with everything? I just don't feel like getting into it all... but basically I think calling it gay sex has nothing to do with the activity... two heterosexuals can have oral sex, or anal sex, etc, and they do. I don't understand why Molly and Jim are having sex, but Molly and Sara are having "gay sex", when they're doing the exact same thing. You're labeling the actors, not the action. (also saying PIV sex is "straight" and other forms of sex are "gay" totally disregards trans individuals in both het and gay relationships.) Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Posted May 21, 2015 Share Posted May 21, 2015 (also saying PIV sex is "straight" and other forms of sex are "gay" totally disregards trans individuals in both het and gay relationships.) Absolutey not. One of the problems for, say, a gay transman pre-op is that if he involves his genitals - a vagina - in sexual contact with a man, it will be straight sex, not gay sex, even though they are a gay couple. Until he gets surgery, the only gay sex he could have would be with a woman, never with a man (unless it's a transman, in which case gay sex between these two men means Lesbian sex). Anatomy is the deciding factor here, not orientations or genders. Which oviously is a massive fountain for body and sexual dysphoria in case of trans* folk. Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Posted May 21, 2015 Share Posted May 21, 2015 Anatomy is the deciding factor here, not orientations or genders. Which oviously is a massive fountain for body and sexual dysphoria in case of trans* folk. That's not entirely true, though. I would also argue that when people say "sex" they typically mean penetration... this is one of the reasons why lesbian sex is considered "not sex" but gay boy penetrative sex is. Because it's the penetration that matters, and all combos of people can penetrate each other. Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.