Donate Now
We've Moved! Check out our new boards.
  New Poll  
my profile | directory login | search | faq | forum home

  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» Scarleteen Boards: 2000 - 2014 (Archive) » SCARLETEEN CENTRAL » Sexual Ethics and Politics » Is it REALLY okay to say no?

 - UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!    
Author Topic: Is it REALLY okay to say no?
Heather
Executive Director & Founder
Member # 3

Icon 1 posted      Profile for Heather     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
A month or so ago, a woman at a feminist community I participate in suggested, after the abortion ban in South Dakota seemed imminent, that however practical, however sensible, it would be considered by many to be heretical to suggest that women simply stop having intercourse to curb their risks.

Now, around here, it wouldn't be quite so much: we suggest -- and users to other users as well -- that people unable or unwilling to deal with the risks simply opt out of taking those risks. This is also a queer-inclusive space, which changes the landscape considerably.

And the age of our userbase to whom we sometimes give this advice changes things considerably. It's culturally supported, to some degree, for very young women not to have intercourse, but only because it is culturally supported for single young women not to be having any sort of sex at all, even sex with themselves.

That cultural support changes RADICALLY once that young woman is married, even if she is married at the age of 15. It is then no longer, in any way, widelt culturally supported for her to opt out of intercourse to decrease her risks, or even when she just doesn't want to be having intercourse. Quite the opposite, sadly.

When my colleague and friend made that post, there was another post I'd seen back when, but I couldn't recall where until today when another friend linked to it elsewhere, and, strong language given, it's a post I wanted to share with all of you here, because it's very succinct, and really well spoken.

quote:
"This is not about abortion. If this were about abortion -- specifically, about fewer abortions being performed -- then those interested in reducing that number would hop all over this bill. So I'll say it again, this is not about abortion.

This is about women having sex, and who gets to be in charge of that sex.

Well, really -- that's what it all comes down to, isn't it? At present, there is a movement in place to make sure that (to lift a phrase from Dan Savage) men have orgasms, and women have babies.

There are people in this world who very firmly believe that this is the natural order of things: men have orgasms, and women have babies. This is a sacred balance, whereby a man is made happy for two minutes and a woman spends the next nine months serving as host to a life-threatening parasite, then the next eighteen years held legally, morally, and fiscally responsible for the health and well-being of that parasite ... while the man is free to wander off or stick around at his leisure.

This is a balance that many, many people -- many of them in positions of power -- are willing to go to great lengths to enforce. Never mind that many (but not all) of these people are men, and are therefore unlikely to be held accountable for any parasite more complex than a tapeworm ... for some strange reason or reasons, these people want to make sure that it is very, very difficult for your average American woman to manage her reproductive system.

Most of the people who object to the wide, easy availability of birth control are men.* These men have the luxury of assuming this position because they have no reason to believe that they, personally, have anything at stake. I find this baffling.

The solution is so obvious that it can be boiled down to three words..."

Continue at: http://wicked-wish.livejournal.com/463017.html

*That sentence, for the record, likely refers to the gender of both lawmakers per BC access issues and to the majority gender of leaders of the pro-life movement, just to be clear. And it is an accurate statement in that regard. It is not a gender sterotype nor intended to be a slam.

[ 03-19-2006, 09:07 AM: Message edited by: Miz Scarlet ]

--------------------
Heather Corinna, Executive Director & Founder, Scarleteen
About Me • Get our book!
Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world. Indeed, it is the only thing that ever has. - Margaret Mead

Posts: 68290 | From: An island near Seattle | Registered: May 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
September
Scarleteen Volunteer
Member # 25425

Icon 1 posted      Profile for September     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
What I find even more disturbing than men speaking out against abortion is WOMEN speaking out against abortion. I mean, given that men do not go through pregnancy and are never as bound to the child as the mother, even in the best of circumstances, it's sort of plausible that they'd not fully grasp the magnitude of everything that a pregnancy brings with it. But WOMEN oughta know what is involved. I don't know any females who have been sexually active for a while and have not had the odd pregnancy scare. That, if nothing else, makes you think about things quite a lot and I find it impossible to understand the women who, *knowing*, if not from personal experience then from friends and family, what parenting entails if you are not totally prepared and ready, would voluntarily have that reproductive choice eliminated.

I was talking to a family friend about the abortion ban in South Dakota and while I was defending the right to chose, she explained to me that the choice is one that is made *before* you have sex. Well, excuse me, but that is saying that a woman who does not want to become pregnant should abstain from sex, while a man who has no wish to parent has to make no such choice. I find that incredibly unfair on so many levels that I don't even know where to start complaining.

So yeah. Of course it's okay to say NO. But only if that choice can be made by women independently of fears about unwanted pregnancies that cannot be aborted. The choice still exists if abortion is not an option, but then you're playing with loaded dice - take the risk and have sex, or abstain completely out of fear. Which is why I will never understand women who so freely give away the right to make decisions concerning their own bodies. And I feel resentment against them because they're taking MY choice, as well.

--------------------
Johanna
Scarleteen Volunteer

"The question is not who will let me, but who is going to stop me." -Ayn Rand

Posts: 9192 | From: Cologne, Germany | Registered: Sep 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Heather
Executive Director & Founder
Member # 3

Icon 1 posted      Profile for Heather     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
That was really well spoken.

But for so many women, it really isn't even okay to say no to intercourse. Heck, there are still laws in places on the books which PERMIT a husband to rape his wife. Women are still told, in droves, it is their DUTY to have whatever sort of sex their husband wants, whenever he wants it. Rape victims are continually screwed in the courts, even in reporting rape. Women are still raped every hour of every day, worldwide. Women are forced into prostitution globally all the time, some when still in early childhood. And that's just the really rank stuff.

So, with things like what your friend said? In my book, we're not even able to HAVE that conversation yet, because sex is still NOT optional for a great, great many women. Many women still do not GET to make that choice, and any one of us at any time may be one of those women: many women, like yourself, like myself, already have been.

So, when that's not the case? Okay, let's go there and have that conversation. But the fact alone that even one woman feels compelled to have to tell women at all that sex IS optional, and that this is revelation for some women, and for some others -- sadly -- utter confusion, tells us a whole awful lot about what choices women get to make.

On a related note, I hear you per the resentment. And when I was younger, I resented it a lot more than I do now. The older I get though, the more I go back to everything I learned in college about oppression and oppressed classes -- the more all of that makes sense to me in a very real, practical way. There's a certain sympathy I have for anyone living under any sort of oppression, and a certain leeway I'll give them per what they say and do. Maybe I'm just being overly optimistic, but I'm of the mind that were women NOT an oppressed class, you'd find very few women using the master's tools, as it were; parroting sentiments which are based in fear of them, in hatred of them, and in wanting to keep them down, manageable and easy to control. (Too, plenty of those women who haven't really had the choice -- for whom, even if it's legally available, have had to loie to everyone they knew about having an abortion, or didn't have one when they wanted because it was a choice for them between having a child they didn't want and losing everything else dear to them -- often WILL argue against choice, sometimes because they're resentful, too.)

--------------------
Heather Corinna, Executive Director & Founder, Scarleteen
About Me • Get our book!
Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world. Indeed, it is the only thing that ever has. - Margaret Mead

Posts: 68290 | From: An island near Seattle | Registered: May 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
-Jill
Scarleteen Volunteer
Member # 5375

Icon 1 posted      Profile for -Jill     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
(I'm so happy you posted this. I've probably read that a dozen times, just to remind myself that there is at least one possible solution.)
Posts: 3641 | From: Truckee, CA, US | Registered: Sep 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Bobolink
Activist
Member # 1386

Icon 1 posted      Profile for Bobolink         Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Originally posted by Miz Scarlet:
a woman spends the next nine months serving as host to a life-threatening parasite

I'm afraid that this sentence tells me more about the author then all the rest that she has written and damages her credibility to the point where I can't take any more of her writing in this post without a sense of revulsion

--------------------
I do not feel obliged to believe that the same God who has endowed us with sense, reason, and intellect has intended us to forgo their use.

- Galileo

Posts: 3442 | From: Stirling, Ontario, Canada | Registered: Sep 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Heather
Executive Director & Founder
Member # 3

Icon 1 posted      Profile for Heather     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
As I said, her tone and her clear frustration are apparent.

But by no means do I think that undoes what she is actually saying -- especially since, in many ways, a parasite IS an apt comparison, as it IS life-threatening, and as it DOES feed from its host; the difference is, many of us have times where we deeply love this organism -- nor do I want to see a conversation about the content derailed on that basis.

Ookutoe:I was saying to the friend in the community I mentioned that, in fact, I think, if need be, or wanted, it could be ana amazing protest. If many, many women -- especially those of us who very much ENJOY intercourse -- protested a loss of our rights and our choice by opting out until we had those rights? Just imagine: it's a pretty powerful thing.

--------------------
Heather Corinna, Executive Director & Founder, Scarleteen
About Me • Get our book!
Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world. Indeed, it is the only thing that ever has. - Margaret Mead

Posts: 68290 | From: An island near Seattle | Registered: May 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
kitka
Scarleteen Volunteer
Member # 22756

Icon 1 posted      Profile for kitka     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Sort of like in Aristophanes' "Lysistrata"?
I wonder how many of our male partners would accept us opting out of sex. Not many, probably.
Maybe that's because a lot of men still equate sex as a reward for offering the "security" of a relationship, or at least, something that everyone just "does" without reservation?

Recently I read an article by a woman who had been married for several years to a very successful husband. She had three children with him and spent the lion's share of her time caring for them. She realized after he divorced her that she had wasted a large part of her life, by constantly subsuming her needs to her family.

Women aren't culturally supported in saying no to sex once they're married - and neither are they supported in saying yes to the things they want to do for themselves, once they're married. Mothering, as an institution, forces many women to choose between two things - themselves or children. Women who are "super moms" seem to have accrued a lot more attention (or respect?) than the traditional stay-at-home mom. But married women who don't want to have children in the first place are often made into pariahs.

I'm hell-bent on not ever having children unless I'm able to have a husband who will make sacrifices equal to mine in order to care for them. Is that selfish of me? Probably. Will I find a man like that? Maybe not.

In opting out of sex to secure reproductive rights, could women also use that kind of protest to secure rights within marriage?
Or would that just obscure the first issue?

Posts: 455 | From: New York, NY | Registered: Apr 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
NotApplicable
Neophyte
Member # 26184

Icon 1 posted      Profile for NotApplicable     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
I think if you "Opted out" because you lost abortion rights, it would doubtlessly be an enourmous failure. The right wing would say "See, if they can't erase their mistakes, they stop making them!" and then apply the same logic to other sexual issues like the availability of pre-conceptual birth control or the vaccine for HPV. Politics aside, pro-lifers would go to bed feeling they had done a good days work.
Posts: 13 | Registered: Nov 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Heather
Executive Director & Founder
Member # 3

Icon 1 posted      Profile for Heather     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
I really, really don't see the religious right being excited or feeling it was a victory for women to refuse to have intercourse.

For many women who don't feel they even can, there could be a win for those women just in being ABLE to say no.

And since the majority of those who ID as pro-life are men, most of whom are also heterosexual? Women not having sex with them anymore is something I have a really hard time visualizng them feeling smug about.

--------------------
Heather Corinna, Executive Director & Founder, Scarleteen
About Me • Get our book!
Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world. Indeed, it is the only thing that ever has. - Margaret Mead

Posts: 68290 | From: An island near Seattle | Registered: May 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
loudasthehelliwant
Neophyte
Member # 28148

Icon 1 posted      Profile for loudasthehelliwant     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Oh, Lysistra... gotta love it. :-P

Interesting convo.

Posts: 7 | From: Chicago | Registered: Mar 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
logic_grrl
Scarleteen Volunteer
Member # 8067

Icon 1 posted      Profile for logic_grrl     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
For many women who don't feel they even can, there could be a win for those women just in being ABLE to say no.

But the question is, what would have to change in society first for those significant numbers of women to feel able to say no to intercourse?

Because at the moment, that sort of protest happening on a wide scale is just not remotely feasible or likely.

The only time when it's socially accepted for women to say no to intercourse seems to be when they're "saving" it for another male figure - God or a future husband.

Even on the boards here, with young women who are finding penis-in-vagina intercourse completely unsatisfying, the discussion often ends up revolving around "make sure you get some clitoral stimulation and do other things as well".

"If it really don't do anything at all for you on any level, then consider not doing it, and find other things you both enjoy" doesn't get discussed much.

The possibility that in some cases you could have a sexual relationship between a woman and a man that is satisfying for both and that doesn't include intercourse at all doesn't really seem to be on the table.

--------------------
"Do not be daunted by the enormity of the world's grief. Do justly, now. Love mercy, now. Walk humbly, now. You are not obligated to complete the work, but neither are you free to abandon it." - the Talmud

Posts: 6944 | From: UK | Registered: May 2002  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Heather
Executive Director & Founder
Member # 3

Icon 1 posted      Profile for Heather     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
I completely agree with you.

And obviously, a whole lot would have to change. There are still laws on the books globally and locally, for instance, which basicaly state that a husband cannot rape his wife because marriage lawfully permits him open access to her body: less horrendously, but still in the category of bloody awful, there are laws and precedents which make rape within marriage a minor, rarely-punishable crime, seen less as a crime than as a husband just being an oaf. And these are just one of a myriad, myriad issues which contribute here. Obviously, the very biggest issues are that women in NO society yet have equal status as a class, and that women in nearly, if not every society, are still seen as the sexual property of men, especially -- though not only -- when married.

(And I really hope we have enough discussion even here that DOES make clear that intercourse is always -- should always be -- optional. if we don't, we seriously need to repair that.)

But I think that women who already CAN say no and DO say no simply making themselves visible as doing so would be a big help. Perhaps -- given the greater agency and power of men as a class -- even more powerful would be men saying, clearly and visibly, that no is an absolutely, inarguably acceptable answer, at any time, even at all times. And not because they're being "nice guys" and letting women off the hook, either. Rather, because no NOT being an acceptable answer, always, is slavery.

quote:
The only time when it's socially accepted for women to say no to intercourse seems to be when they're "saving" it for another male figure - God or a future husband.
Too, too true. And too, too sad.

Of course, another help would be to work to make culture less heteronormative as a whole. For women in lesbian relationships, for instance, unless heteronorms have been brought into effect, there really is no "required" sexual activity of one kind, and no prescribed role about which partner gets the upper hand when it comes to calling the sexual shots. I know personally, in discussing issues like this with male partners I have had in my life, it's come to light a few times that knowing I'm a queer woman, who has had partnerships of all types, with all genders, has made not assuming those roles do exist, should exist, apparently easier for my partners, and without any feeling of robbery. For as many women who don't enjoy intercourse or want it all the time, there generally are nearly as many men who feel similarly, be it about physical aspects or emotional ones, especially when a power struggle is off the table.

--------------------
Heather Corinna, Executive Director & Founder, Scarleteen
About Me • Get our book!
Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world. Indeed, it is the only thing that ever has. - Margaret Mead

Posts: 68290 | From: An island near Seattle | Registered: May 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
summergoddess
Activist
Member # 11352

Icon 1 posted      Profile for summergoddess     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
This was 5 years ago. I had been sexually active for a while. My partner and I found out that we were having an unplanned pregnancy. We talked about all the options, and together we chose to abort. There were many reasons for this termination. I’m going to stress that my partner did not pressure me to abort and he was not against abortion as well. The right was mine to abort and he respected that. We’re still together to this day and about to be married next month.

It is okay to say NO. We all have the right to say NO to sex, to pregnancy, to abortion and etc and the right to be respected for what we choose.

Women are still told, in droves, it is their DUTY to have whatever sort of sex their husband wants, whenever he wants it.

^^Sex should be a consensual thing that partners should agree to, and that includes positions, and what not. My partner and I don’t pressure the other if we don’t feel horny to make love, or if we find ourselves in a uncomfortable sexual act or position. We’ve said NO to each other if we’re too tired to have sex or we just don’t want to. We have fully respected each other’s wishes when that happens. This respect will continue into marriage when we become husband and wife next month.

Women aren't culturally supported in saying no to sex once they're married - and neither are they supported in saying yes to the things they want to do for themselves, once they're married. Mothering, as an institution, forces many women to choose between two things - themselves or children.

^^This is really sad. The cultural support SHOULD be there for woman for whatever they do in their marriage both inside the bedroom and outside of the bedroom. We aren’t planning on having children for at least three years or so into our marriage. I want to finish school, I want to work, have us have a house and cars and just be financially set before we have kids. My partner feels the same way. When I become a mom, I’m not going to be the traditional stay home mom. I am returning to work after I have had my year’s worth of maternity leave. I know that I can be both a full time career woman and a full time mother. I am not willing to choose between work and children. I want to have BOTH! If we find ourselves well off with our careers, my partner wants to be the stay home dad to our kids and I would love to have him take on that role because I have no problem with it.

I don’t care if you have been sexually active prior to marriage and into marriage, YOU do have the right to NOT have intercourse or any other sexual acts for that matter with your partner if you wish not to participate. You DO have the right to wait to be pregnant until you are ready and want to be a mother.

--------------------
~Jules

Posts: 369 | From: Ontario, Canada | Registered: Jan 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Heather
Executive Director & Founder
Member # 3

Icon 1 posted      Profile for Heather     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
We all have the right to say NO to sex, to pregnancy, to abortion and etc and the right to be respected for what we choose.
Thing is, no, we all don't.

Plenty of marriage laws -- even in some states in the U.S. -- for instance, don't give women that right.

We SHOULD all have that right, but no, many women really don't.

--------------------
Heather Corinna, Executive Director & Founder, Scarleteen
About Me • Get our book!
Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world. Indeed, it is the only thing that ever has. - Margaret Mead

Posts: 68290 | From: An island near Seattle | Registered: May 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
likewhoa19
Activist
Member # 28218

Icon 1 posted      Profile for likewhoa19     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Which states, would you mind listing?
Posts: 193 | From: Massachusetts | Registered: Apr 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Heather
Executive Director & Founder
Member # 3

Icon 1 posted      Profile for Heather     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
At last cursory check, in Kentucky, Missouri, New Mexico, North Carolina, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota (oh, South Dakota) and Utah. Some of those states simply deny that a male spouse CAN rape at all, others make exception for a spouse per chanrges and punishment. And in many states, the amount of time suggested to be served by a spouse who rapes is lesser than for anyone else who rapes.

(This is one of many reasons why your Miz S. fights the idea of legal marriage for herself tooth and nail.)

But i'd have to take a look at each state's separate laws and bills on the table currently to verify those are still standing.

Here's a good overview about women and the law in the U.S. from the American Bar Association, for some more general info on issues like these: http://www.abanet.org/media/factbooks/

Here's some other info on spousal rape and the law specifically: http://www.ncvc.org/ncvc/main.aspx?dbName=DocumentViewer&DocumentID=32701womenlaw.pdf

--------------------
Heather Corinna, Executive Director & Founder, Scarleteen
About Me • Get our book!
Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world. Indeed, it is the only thing that ever has. - Margaret Mead

Posts: 68290 | From: An island near Seattle | Registered: May 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Aela 57
Neophyte
Member # 27587

Icon 1 posted      Profile for Aela 57     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Just as a quick addition, I'm pretty happy to say rape is illegal in marriage in English law, it has been since 1993 and is treat with the same severity as outside of marriage.

--------------------
Aela. 19, 5'9. Often confused.

Posts: 20 | From: UK | Registered: Feb 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
bluefreak44
Activist
Member # 12381

Icon 1 posted      Profile for bluefreak44     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Originally posted by kitka:

Women aren't culturally supported in saying no to sex once they're married - and neither are they supported in saying yes to the things they want to do for themselves, once they're married. Mothering, as an institution, forces many women to choose between two things - themselves or children. Women who are "super moms" seem to have accrued a lot more attention (or respect?) than the traditional stay-at-home mom. But married women who don't want to have children in the first place are often made into pariahs.

I think it's a misconception that married women are not encouraged to make their own decisions, at least in the Bible belt. I live in the Bible belt, raised in a very conservative small town. I'm married now, and feel absolutely no guilt about turning down sex if I'm not in the mood. Honestly, the Bible does teach that as husband and wives, one's body belongs to the other. However, many Christians I have talked believe in that but also believe it's very important to marry someone who does not pressure when it comes to intimacy. My husband completely understands if I'm not in the mood, so it's not even an issue for me. Also, my husband really wants children, but I'm pretty small stature (and he's really not), and so we've talked about just adopting or something. I just wanted to clarify that. I may be a conservative Bible belt housewife, but I'm not just a baby machine. In fact, most of the adults in my family had children first and then tried to further their educations, so if anything I am being pressured NOT to have children. I am certainly not sexually oppressed. I get the feeling sometimes that those who have not lived in conservative areas, or who have lived in a bad example of a conservative area, don't really understand.

I won't say much else. I'm conservative and pro-life, and I'd rather not get flamed.

Posts: 81 | From: MO, USA | Registered: Mar 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Heather
Executive Director & Founder
Member # 3

Icon 1 posted      Profile for Heather     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Do note that Kitka said CULTURALLY. That means OUTSIDE one smaller location or area. Culture is a pretty big thing, and much of it is global, which is why we've primarily been talking about this issue from that perspective.

And no one here even suggested that any married woman is a "baby machine," in fact this whole thread is in protest of that idea, so I really resent it even being implied anyone here is assuming such. And we don't allow flaming here, of anyone.

Do also be aware that plenty of people HAVE had experiences in living in more rural or conservative areas, and/or in speaking with many people from same, and/or in reading works done on women as a class (and in history) in various areas, though again, no one here was discussing "bible belt wives," but ALL women. That also includes Biblical reading, which is by no means egalitarian in whose property is whose among married couples, when it comes to sex amongst other things. (That isn't to say plenty may not choose to practice Biblically-based traditions differently, but suggesting that the Bible does not send the very clear message in most of its parts that wives ARE sexual property is pretty darn slippery.)

In your state, for the record, only very recently has marriage as a defense for raping or abusing a spouse -- as in, a husband is legally permitted to do so to his wife, as he is his property -- been removed. Only relatively recently in MO have statutes been revised which legally now (but did not) consider married women -- specifically, men always had these rights -- capable of having sole property, their own bank accounts without permission, etc. These are the sorts of issues we're talking about when we say "culturally."

[ 05-29-2006, 07:20 PM: Message edited by: Miz Scarlet ]

--------------------
Heather Corinna, Executive Director & Founder, Scarleteen
About Me • Get our book!
Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world. Indeed, it is the only thing that ever has. - Margaret Mead

Posts: 68290 | From: An island near Seattle | Registered: May 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
MaryTheGypsy
Activist
Member # 28834

Icon 1 posted      Profile for MaryTheGypsy     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
I honestly don't know what to say. I'm so overwhelmed by emotion that its kind of hard to string my thoughts into a logical stream.

All I can say is

1. Yes, sometimes women don't have a choice. Thier choice is taken away, and it makes me sick. I've encountered this firsthand.

2. My mother is pro-life and would hate me forever if I got an abortion. Reguardless, if I got pregnant and I wasn't ready, I would have an abortion. I simply would have to do it with the knowledge that my mother would most probably never speak to me again. Making such a choice is heartwrenching.

3. I sometimes feel this whole dang situation is unfair. I really wish all the sexually active women(or the women who are with our cause) could form some mass form of protest.

Thats the best I can do right now. This whole subject has just got me riled up.

--------------------
~Mary

“People out there must be told about the self-loathing that follows rape and how it's the greatest breakage in divine law to mutilate themselves, as I have done.” Tori Amos

Posts: 40 | From: Virginia | Registered: May 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
bluefreak44
Activist
Member # 12381

Icon 1 posted      Profile for bluefreak44     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Originally posted by Miz Scarlet:
Do note that Kitka said CULTURALLY. That means OUTSIDE one smaller location or area. Culture is a pretty big thing, and much of it is global, which is why we've primarily been talking about this issue from that perspective.

In your state, for the record, only very recently has marriage as a defense for raping or abusing a spouse -- as in, a husband is legally permitted to do so to his wife, as he is his property -- been removed. Only relatively recently in MO have statutes been revised which legally now (but did not) consider married women -- specifically, men always had these rights -- capable of having sole property, their own bank accounts without permission, etc. These are the sorts of issues we're talking about when we say "culturally."

I was in a little bit of a rant mode. I guess I retaliated to a rant with a rant.

I realize that she was referring to culture. I just know that from talking to people from more urban areas (at college), that when the issue of women's rights is addressed, it is usually the rural, "Bible belt" areas that are criticized, since the areas are generally more homogenous. One can't get lost in a town of 300 like he or she can in an urban area, and due to the typical uniformity of such rural areas, people seem to be more comfortable forming stereotypes of such areas. People often seem to assume that the problems evident in one rural community can be attributed to many rural communities. I was partially responding to the topic, and partially ranting (which I apologize for). I addressed "Bible belt" areas because when a topic such as this surfaces, some mention those who abuse the Bible to fit their own chauvenistic ideas. In an area where Biblical morality isn't as much of an issue, chauvenists have to find other sources for their abuse, and concrete sources for those ideas (beyond "culture", which itself is hard to define) are hard to find.

Posts: 81 | From: MO, USA | Registered: Mar 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Heather
Executive Director & Founder
Member # 3

Icon 1 posted      Profile for Heather     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
And yet, that is not what we were discussing here. At all. There is some discussion of Biblical issues, but that's a document and dogma which is global, and not even oringinally based in any area of the US.

(In other words, you're pissed about stereotypes about you and yours based on where you're from, and that's undersnatndably frustarting and worthy of a rant, one that could absolutely find a place to have its own topic here if you wanted, or be added on to another existing, related topic. But derailing a topic not about that to do so isn't so cool.)

--------------------
Heather Corinna, Executive Director & Founder, Scarleteen
About Me • Get our book!
Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world. Indeed, it is the only thing that ever has. - Margaret Mead

Posts: 68290 | From: An island near Seattle | Registered: May 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Beppie
Scarleteen Volunteer
Member # 94

Icon 1 posted      Profile for Beppie     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
I think another thing that is important to remember about this discussion is that it doesn't only refer to saying "no" in individual instances; most people would acknowledge that people have the right to say no to intercourse on any single day (though that may not come through in their practice), but what if someone wanted to say no on EVERY single day?

I think that it doesn't really matter whether you're coming from a conservative or liberal perspective, within heterosexual relationships, there is an expectation that at some stage they will include intercourse with some regularity. What happens if a woman says "no" to intercourse for a month, for a year, for an indefinite period of time? How many women would have the option of actually doing that, while remaining in a relationship, if she wanted to completely avoid the risk of an unwanted pregnancy?

Posts: 2710 | From: Australia | Registered: Jun 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Irm
Activist
Member # 27418

Icon 1 posted      Profile for Irm     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Beppie, I think that even if a woman found herself able to stand up both against the potentially direct and physical threats to her celibacy, AND the cultural pressure to abandon it, her position within society would be severely damaged by such a decision. It's rather lose-lose. If a woman goes without marriage or sex for too long, then she is eventually considered a "prude", or viewed as though there is something "wrong" with her because she "can't get herself a man". Since value is judged to some level, in varying degrees depending upon area, by the male sexuality being "bestowed" upon a woman, it may be difficult for a woman to establish her own worth. The only times when prolonged celibacy seems to be acceptable is in instances where it is religious. (So really, if you don't want pregnancy risks... become a nun.)
Posts: 213 | From: Private | Registered: Feb 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Beppie
Scarleteen Volunteer
Member # 94

Icon 1 posted      Profile for Beppie     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
I agree, RedGoddess. Not sure that this came across in my post, but that was exactly what I was trying to imply with all those rhetorical questions. [Smile] Well put.
Posts: 2710 | From: Australia | Registered: Jun 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
kitka
Scarleteen Volunteer
Member # 22756

Icon 1 posted      Profile for kitka     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
For the record - people form stereotypes of urban areas as easily as they do of rural ones.

but what if someone wanted to say no on EVERY single day?

This scenario was exactly what I had in mind when I wrote "culturally supported" (and per the Lysistrata reference).

Beppie's absolutely right that, regardless of political/religious/cultural beliefs, or locative place, rural or urban, or a dating or married relationship... most men EXPECT women to have intercourse, and many women do not feel secure in delaying intercourse until a junction where they feel ready. Yes, a lot of women delay intercourse, but with what degree of certainty?

difficult for a woman to establish her own worth

Yes - especially outside of the rubric of sexuality and gendered expectations.
As long as they're denied (male) privilege, women have to fight uphill in order to protect their interests.

Posts: 455 | From: New York, NY | Registered: Apr 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Heather
Executive Director & Founder
Member # 3

Icon 1 posted      Profile for Heather     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Heck, most WOMEN expect women to have intercourse with men. If you spend any decent amount of time with women of various ages/generations and some real diversity, and discuss these sorts of issues, good luck if you can find more than a few who either don't expect other women to do so, or who haven't had a mother, grandmother, woman they worked with, friend, aunt, sister, you name it, who haven't sent the message, often overtly, that it is reasonable to be expected to regularly have intercourse when a woman is partnered with a man, period, and usually based on the man's wants first.

--------------------
Heather Corinna, Executive Director & Founder, Scarleteen
About Me • Get our book!
Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world. Indeed, it is the only thing that ever has. - Margaret Mead

Posts: 68290 | From: An island near Seattle | Registered: May 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
kitka
Scarleteen Volunteer
Member # 22756

Icon 1 posted      Profile for kitka     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Yeah... and that expectation raises my hackles, particularly when it comes to the initial stages of dating. If I want to wait, then I'm going to. But guys (especially younger ones?) perceive this as manipulation.
I wish there were more women who ignored those expectations, which might change men's minds in turn.

Posts: 455 | From: New York, NY | Registered: Apr 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
   

  New Poll   Close Topic   Feature Topic   Move Topic   Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
 - Printer-friendly view of this topic
Hop To:


Contact Us | Get the Whole Story! Go Home to SCARLETEEN: Sex Ed for the Real World | Privacy Statement

Copyright 1998, 2014 Heather Corinna/Scarleteen
Scarleteen.com: Providing comprehensive sex education online to teens and young adults worldwide since 1998

Information on this site is provided for educational purposes. It is not meant to and cannot substitute for advice or care provided by an in-person medical professional. The information contained herein is not meant to be used to diagnose or treat a health problem or disease, or for prescribing any medication. You should always consult your own healthcare provider if you have a health problem or medical condition.

Powered by UBB.classic™ 6.7.3