Sexual Abuse as the Cis Norm for Sex Education

TW dysphoria and rape

Let's talk about how cis people have sexually abused me my entire life. FUN!
Being raped multiple times wasn't traumatic... so I felt for a while, only I'm now realizing this is an inversion of reality.
Being raped wasn't more traumatic than sex in general, not enough for me to notice a significant difference.
To understand why sex has historically been traumatic for me, we need to first look at what healthy sex looks like:
It requires informed consent and co-determination. I need to be aware of what is happening and have the ability to exercise bodily agency.
I, like many queer and trans folk, was raised to view penis-in-vagina as The Sex, and with zero acknowledgement that dysphoria is possible.
Every single person who had the opportunity to educate me, grossly neglected to de-center PIV or present other options for sex as equal.
The only context my vagina was mentioned was as either a source of magical Jesus powers, or as a source of profound sexual liberation.
It is especially important to note that every cis male partner I've had was actively pushing this repression/liberation sex binary for years.
I was actively taught to view my intense discomfort with vaginal stimulation (even in a loving caring context) as something that's fixable.
I was expected to change. Always me. Never the other person. Never the way society pushed their cis agenda.
Individual partners claimed to respect my desires to avoid certain contact, but would guilt me on how their "needs" were equally valid.
All of the sex-positivity cultural rhetoric was on their side as I was shamed for not being "good, giving, & game".
No one ever suggested even once that my feelings were normal or natural, and that their sexual pressure was the dysfunction.
Fact: informed consent is not possible when cis people have actively obstructed education on trans bodies and queer sex.
Fact: bodily agency and sexual co-determination is not possible in the midst of ongoing gaslighting.
Fact: cis-centered sex education is abusive, and cis people who aren't actively working to dismantle that are complicit in ongoing abuse.

ÍslendingaApp: Icelanders' anti-incest app.

It's 2013, right? Surely people in Iceland have sex for fun way more than they have sex for babies. Why do they need an anti-incest app? [content note: classism in comments] 

Some have suggested that Iceland is so culturally closed off from the rest of the world that they risk becoming a nation of "inbreds". I disagree. I don't think they can. It would have to be a small handful of people over multiple generations (think the Pharaohs of Egypt, or certain noble houses of England). I'll leave it to the actual geneticists to settle this one, though.

I do think it's worth exploring why people are concerned about things like bumping cousins outside of the context of reproduction, though. Or to phrase it another way: why do we instantly think of babies when we think of "incest"?

We've fought long and hard for sex and even marriage itself to be recognized as something for more than reproduction. We had to do this to validate same-sex relationships, even though (gasp!) no babies will result*. We had to do this to validate birth control for teens, unmarried women, and really anyone at all. Masturbation even used to be called "onanism" because of a Bible story about a guy who would rather jerk it than impregnate someone.

But suggest that a person might want to have a one-night stand with their cuz, and ZOMG INCEST! and they make an entire fucking app for it?

Unless it turns out that the majority of children in Iceland are born within the context of casual cousin-sex gone amok... maybe I could see the need for caution.

*which erases trans experiences, but I digress

"I'm just not attracted to X"

I've noticed quite a lot of "I'm just not attracted to X" in my years, where X happens to be a member of society that is explicitly propped up as "revolting" by the media and the general public. X includes trans people, black people, fat people, etc. "I'm not racist, I just can't" I've heard. And you know what? I'm not debating whether someone "can", or whether someone "should", as if anyone has an obligation to prove their possibilities by forcing them into realities.

But I do expect people to be mature enough to know when they've been instructed "thou shalt not" from birth, that they're not experiencing a unique unbiased independent pure natural totally-has-nothing-to-do-with-society attraction. Not in a society that has been flooding their minds from birth with these anti-X messages. I also expect people to understand that, even if it feels like their sexuality is operating outside of society, that their own messages which contribute to the "X is revolting", even if not explicitly saying as much, are going to be added to that arsenal by society as a weapon against the next X person.

So again: I don't expect anyone to run off and force themselves into sexual experiments or whatnot. That's not what this is about. This is about being willing to introspectively critique one's own place in society, and how deep that external influence can actually go.

Edit to Add:

What I say: “Personal preferences don’t exist in a vacuum.”

What people read: “Personal preferences don’t exist.”

Sigh...

Gratuitous NPH

Fixed it for you.

Whoever made the original is just disgusting.
Also, that's NPH on the left.
You do know who he is, right?



Guize?



Srsly guize:



SRSLY:

Sex-Positive vs Trans Equality

There is no "vs".

I'll re-emphasize:

THERE IS NO COMPETITION.

I don't know where this epic battle originated nor why it's perpetuated to the levels we're seeing online (mostly targeted at Laci Green and at the so-called "Tumblr SJ Community"), but it has its roots in bullshit.

That's right:

BULLSHIT.

Tonight I'm going camping with some awesome trans peeps. We need body autonomy, we need positive sexuality, we need acceptance, we need the support of sex-positive community.

Tomorrow I'm going SlutWalking with some awesome sexpoz peeps. We need body autonomy, we need positive sexuality, we need acceptance, we need the support of the transgender community.

And you know what? Maybe some of us has let the others down on both sides. But we're trying. We're looking forward. We're coming together tomorrow night for a Transgender Panel at SlutWalk (I'm going to see many of the same people at both events). There is respect, there is concern, and there is hopefully increased understanding and compassion for each other.

So when I see all this SELFISH FOOLISH BICKERING all over my Tumblr and my internets, I am hurt. I am drained of my optimism and hope. Yes, things may need to be said, and people may need to learn lessons. But when it fucking goes to 11 and stays that way for as long as this has, it's time to get a fucking grip and either BECOME THE SOLUTION OR SIT THE FUCK DOWN AND SHUT THE FUCK UP.

Question: Andy, are you a card-holding homosexual?

Because I have a legitimate question for someone with a better grasp on how homosexuals classify or define homosexuality...and this is after I was (no kidding) in "the gay dorm" in college. It was in a themed college in Northern California - and the dorms were all themed too...and our dorm was the "gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgendered, Jewish" dorm.
So, how do homosexuals account for or classify people that have the urge to experiment and *like* it, but are "primarily straight"? There's no great way to ask this question - and believe me, I'm one of the most LGBTQIA-friendly folk, but I still don't know if all homosexuals are literally "born that way", but I'm curious to know what someone of that orientation feels. Also, and slightly related, Is there any talk about (or truth to) the idea of a kid's sexuality being "rewired" after some form of abuse? I don't know if that's still something people say, or if that was one of those things conservatives said to dismiss homosexuality as a "problem to be fixed."
Anyway Andy, I appreciate you answering any of that - and if it didn't make sense, I'm typing from my iPhone, so I literally don't know how to scroll up and re-read what I wrote without losing it.

The classification of people into identity groups based on their sexual orientations is a recent development in human history as a necessary step toward political organization for rights. It isn't, however, necessarily based on what's most useful for people to relate to themselves. The "lifestyle choice vs born this way" debate, then, is also based from that perspective.

What we know about human behavior in all areas is that it's far more complicated than that. It is useful in certain circumstances to help someone understand "I am not choosing to go to hell, I'm a normal healthy part of the human experience" as a way for them to come to terms with being themselves in a world that hates them. But I will point out that the problem is entirely external - if people would stop being haters, nobody would need to find a "justification" in genetic determinism.

But if someone were born one way, and then experienced a traumatic event (abuse or brain injury or whatever) and became a different way, how then would we come to the conclusion that there is even a problem to be fixed? Because its origins are something distasteful to us? That doesn't lead us to want to cure Spiderman. Of course not, Spiderman is cool, and even a traumatic origin story doesn't mean the end result isn't amazing. That's how it is with being queer. I'm baffled that people out there would suggest I waste countless hours trying to undo a part of myself that to me is a good thing.

Then we come to the heart of your question: what if we could chose? Granted, that's still looking at it too simply. There are no such things as "free choices", because every choice comes with a baggage of all sorts of good or bad consequences. We tend to focus on physical responses in our society: the physical response of being sexually attracted, sexually indifferent, or sexually repulsed by a particular body. But that's not the only aspect of human sexuality that is significant in defining our choices and experiences. Personality is another: you know those people you just love being around, who make any activity more fun than if you had done it alone. Why not sex? Why not experimentation?

Well, it could be awkward. And there lies the heart of the matter. Awkward because society has wired us to feel that way. And sometimes people hear social training as something that you can just "choose" to undo. And maybe you can, and maybe you can't. Again, that depends on the baggage of that choice's consequences. (Go ahead, try to "choose" to walk down the street stark naked in front of an elementary school building, see what sorts of psychological and social trauma you might manage to escape.) It's what is known philosophically as "compulsory heterosexuality" (this is where you have fun Googling, hint hint).

I'm pansexual. That means I don't experience attraction along the linear scale ranging from homosexual-bisexual-heterosexual. It's more like wibbly wobbly sexy wexy feelings all around. That means, I absolutely can have a choice in who I am attracted to and who I am not. Granted, my choice isn't always the final say in the matter, there are some things I'm genuinely repulsed by (independent of gender or genitalia). I might have difficulty getting it on with someone who is a real jerk, or who thinks they're a psychic vampire, or who is covered in weird pimples, for example. I am definitely into people who are smart and funny in a pleasant disarming way, and who care about me as a person. But damn, 7 billion people on the planet? Of course I'm making some choices.

tl;dr - You might be labeled "bicurious" or "heteroflexible". If that sort of thing even matters.

Can a Trans Person Turn You Gay? or What Is "Straight" Anyway?

Tina sez: The definition of a straight person is someone who has an strong aversion to having sex with someone of the same gender, however that person or their genitals look. While your birth gender may not hold any importance to you, you do not have the right to say if this is important to your partner. I would not wish to have sex with another woman, but also I would not wish to have sex with that same woman if she had a doctor put her on male hormones and construct her a penis etc, to me, she is still a woman. I sympathize with the trans persons plight, that they want to be other than the sex they were born, but I have to admit that to me, as to many straight people, that just isn’t possible. I know that this is not what you want to hear, and I’m sorry about that, but I am being honest here, and I hope you can appreciate that. Actually, what I think should not matter, and I hope you live your life however you wish, and more power to you. Wear whatever you like, as I do, do whatever you wish with your own body, as I do, live however you like, as I do, and stuff anyone else’s approval. But… While I do agree that each individuals gender is their own business, when you connect intimately with another, it becomes their business as well, and you should first make sure that they know enough to make an informed decision about if they want to have sex with a trans person or not. That is, if you want to be honest and upfront, and really, if you don’t want to do that, then it’s not going to end well for anyone.

Andy sez: The definition of a straight person is someone who has an strong aversion to having sex with someone of the same gender, however that person or their genitals look. While your birth gender may hold great importance to you, you do not have the right to say if this is important to your partner. I would not necessarily mind to have sex with someone who was concerned about my personal history, but also I would not wish to have sex with that same woman if she decided she knows more about my identity than myself, she is still a bigot. I sympathize with the confused cis person’s plight, that they want the world to be black-and-white, but I have to admit that to me, as to many people, that just isn’t possible. I know that this is not what you want to hear, and I’m sorry about that, but I am being honest here, and I hope you can appreciate that. Actually, what I think should not be the only thing that matters. Wear whatever you like, as I do, do whatever you wish with your own body, as I do, live however you like, as I do, and stuff anyone else’s approval. But… While I do agree that each individuals sex lives are their own business, when you connect intimately with another, it becomes their business as well, and you should first make sure that they know enough to make an informed decision about if they want to have sex with a bigot or not. That is, if you want to be honest and upfront, and really, if you don’t want to do that, then it’s not going to end well for anyone.

HOTT

Q: Here's a hypothetical scenario. If you got into a relationship with a "women" and you had sex with this "women". A few months later you find out this "women" was not born a women. What would be your reaction?

A: OK, I'll hold back the laughter for long enough to (unfortunately) validate this question with a response:
HOT.
Because anyone I'm in a relationship with and having sex with is HOT, so therefore any aspect of their past that contributed to their present state is also HOT.
Hell, I'll even add an extra T for emphasis on how HOTT the people are to me that I choose to be with.
Also, the "scare quotes" don't emphasize anything but your insecurity.

Why do so many feminists seem to be anti-sex?

A curious mind asks:
Hello again. I have been dealing with an issue that I believe is rooted in religious morality. The issue is of being sex-positive.
Within some feminist circles, I sense reluctance if not outright disapproval about women who are proud of and enjoy their sexuality. To be honest, it feels as that if a woman were to really enjoy her sexual nature and beauty then she’s a traitor to feminism.
I resent that to the extreme. I don’t want to point out that men get to fully enjoy that aspect about themselves without any apology. I understand objectification and commodification of women, truly I do; however, I’ve seen some ultra-feminists shy away from sex-positive females if not outright condemn them.
I know I’m new to this group so I’d like to get a sense of what you all think…

It’s a very complicated issue.  First, feminists enjoy sex at the same rate as the population at large.  There are lesbians, straights, bisexuals, asexuals, all types.  They even use birth control and sometimes even make jokes about how they must be sluts as a result.  The fact that women are shamed for liking sex where men are shamed for not liking sex (and apparently all other genders are invisible) is sexism.  Feminism is against harmful gender-based double standards like that.

However, just because someone likes doing something doesn’t mean it’s good for gender equality as a whole.  Take for example the issue of posting nude photos of yourself online as a political act.  In Egypt, that can be quite a revolutionary statement against the male ownership of women’s bodies.  In the USA, if you think you’re being revolutionary, you’re a joke - we have no shortage of nude women and we never will.  Context.*  I mean, knock yourself out, there’s no shame in being proud of your body, but don’t assign political meaning to an act where there is none.

Which leads me to another thing that many feminists are critical of: the idea of sexual “empowerment”.  I have observed that there is a tendency to equate “empowering women” with “getting women to feel like pandering to the male gaze is something women do for each other and not for men”.  Protip: it’s called the male gaze for a reason.  And the reason it’s so frustrating (infuriating, even) is that there’s a decided lack of balance in society to celebrate other women’s choices to dress in sloppy clothes or swear off makeup or to (gasp!) dress in butch styles as “empowering women”.  Apparently it’s only worth celebrating if the hetero man-penis approves.

I’m sex-positive.  But it is so disappointing how many sex-positive blogs I read that embrace the above biases.  They claim to be about embracing the whole sexual person, but then they only focus on stories that pander to the male gaze.  Queer bodies aren’t represented.  Asexual experiences aren’t represented.  Monogamous couples barely get any notice except for those who practice extreme forms of BDSM.  Again, this isn’t all of them.  (I’d like to take the opporunity to encourage everyone to visit sexstl.org as an example of a group I admire.)  But when feminists see people take the patriarchy, wrap it in a pretty ribbon, and then try to sell it as sex-positivity, we feel cheated by the continual wasted opportunities for real progress.

*Someone has correctly pointed out that, even within the USA, certain bodies can be revolutionary that are traditionally marginalized by our society.

SLUT

This word is getting quite a workout in recent times.  Between the Limbaughs who use it as a way to dehumanize and the Slutwalkers who use it as a way to rage against rape culture, the word “slut” is getting pulled in any and every direction with everyone trying to put it to use for their own personal agenda.

Some women are trying to grab a hold of the word “slut” and claim it as a badge of honor.  It’s unfair how there isn’t a word for “women who love sex” that isn’t a horrible insult, unlike how words for “men who love sex” are all compliments.  And from a certain perspective, women who love sex are the ones most entitled to use that word in any way they like.

The only problem is, conservadouchebags are the ones who continue to hold power in society.  They’re also the ones who continue to decide that words like “slut” and “whore” are insults, and they’re the ones who have the power to use those words to harm women.  Can women fight back and make “slut” an acceptable identity, much the way queers have with that word?

Perhaps.  But as long as the word continues to cause harm, everyone needs to take a good look at why they feel the need to use it.  ”Am I using this word for myself with pride?  Or am I using it against someone else without their consent?”  Until we succeed in our all-out takeover of society by flaming atheist liberal feminists (and why stop even then?), we can’t let our starry-eyed vision of a better tomorrow cloud our ability to see the realities of today.