Sex: The Monster That’s In The Bed Not Under It

Posted on: April 17th, 2012 by Liandra 4 Comments

Children are easy to scare. There are children’s stories specifically designed to scare children into obedience, the bible is full of this fear and control morality. It seems adults scare pretty easily too and never more so than when it comes to children and sex, the bible knows a lot about this too. Childhood sexuality can’t be discussed thoroughly for fear it will encourage paedophiles or that the talk itself will somehow prematurely destroy the innocence of childhood. It’s the same stupid mentality that thinks women’s sexuality needs to be controlled and shamed for fear of encouraging rape or turning women into uncontrollable sluts. This is the reason why both children and women who suffer sexual abuse have to manage not only their recovery from the trauma but they must also endure feelings of guilt and responsibility for simply being sexual beings like everyone else… as if the very presence of their sexuality is a collusion with their abuser.

 

Refusing to acknowledge and discuss childhood sexuality with each other and with our children is what makes our children vulnerable to those who will but who have abusive agendas. We leave our children dangerously ignorant regarding their own sexual pleasure well into their teens. I masturbated when I was five years old, as did many of my friends. This is common and normal. I was punished for it and told myths about hair growing on my hands and going blind. I have friends who were severely beaten for their natural sexual curiosity.

 

A few parents are gaining the courage these days to say to their children “it’s okay to masturbate but you must be on your own. It’s a private thing. Don’t do it where anyone can see you.” That’s a giant step in the right direction but it’s still avoiding the fact that children play games based around sexual pleasure with each other. We monitor how children play and whether they’re sharing their toys and aren’t biting, hitting, pinching their friends. However, we’re terrified to talk to them openly about Naughty Doctor games and the like. In my daughter’s group of friend’s one child made a rule that no one was allowed to say no. My daughter informed me so I discussed this with the other parents and we addressed it with our children, yet how much better still would it be to do it before the fact and not after. We should be guiding our children with appropriate education not be playing catch up to their experiences or covering our eyes and our ears to reality and remaining mute. So the issue of consent and body autonomy with regard to sexual interaction and sexual pleasure clearly needs to be addressed with our kids as young as five along with concepts of toy sharing, not cheating and compassion that we are trying to instil in our id driven bundles of joy.

 

Sex education that is appropriate and relevant to their peer interaction around sexual pleasure games needs to begin at the same age as their curiosity. You may not feel ready for that as a parent but we need to learn how to be. We are failing our children by avoiding and shirking this parental responsibility. If we acknowledge their sexuality honestly yet protectively and we teach them their accurate anatomy, their total right to body autonomy and the absolute importance of consent our children will not be so susceptible to grooming by sexual abusers as children, teens and later as adults themselves. Those who abuse children get into positions of trust in children’s lives they happen to be the teacher, the friend of the family or a relative, the local priest, the neighbour, a friend’s parent who will acknowledge that child’s sexuality and if they get to be the first to do that they have a power dynamic that we gave them by not accepting reality and educating our children appropriately. It is obvious that the sex negativity of religion is the best social environment for paedophiles because it’s almost a given that the children have not only been kept ignorant about sex but they have been made to fear and loath their own sexual body parts, their own pleasure and their own curiosity. Thus they have been taught to keep deathly silent, ignorant and ashamed. This primes them to be the most groomable for sexual predators… and this is why I believe we see so many paedophiles attracted to positions in the clergy.

 

However, the effects of religious based sex negativity are insidiously prevalent in society at large and simply not espousing sex negative beliefs at home is not enough to prevent your child from picking these cultural messages up that sexual pleasure is bad bad bad and they’re bad bad bad for feeling it. So we need to start pioneering age appropriate sex education. Just as we show our children there’s no monster under their bed, we need to show them there is no monster in their bed or inside of them. We need to shine the light of knowledge, the warmth of acceptance and the security of protection where previously we have left our children scared and alone in the darkness and shadows of ignorance where monsters truly do dwell.

Prostitution, Sex Trafficking and Sex Positivity

Posted on: April 13th, 2012 by Liandra

This article and comments shows that at this time there is contentious debate where there needs to be collaboration. To put it succinctly though rather reductive of course, we have anti-slavery organizations baying for the end of the whole sex industry because of the atrocities of forced prostitution and slavery on one hand. Then we have sex workers who have chosen prostitution of their free will and are fighting for not only sex workers rights and safety within the industry but also for the right to their chosen career also and larger cultural respect and acceptance. You can see easily where the conflict lies.

This is essentially what is problematic about the prostitution industry. As it stands it is deeply criminal and exploitative within a significantly large part of the sex industry. Those who work long-term trying to protect and support women having this experience unsurprisingly have very negative feelings about prostitution and so they apply this to the whole industry because they, by the nature of their work, only deal with the awful parts. In their urgent desire to end abuse they will attack even those women who control their careers, have safe careers and respectful clients and have chosen to do this for themselves. Of course, these women who have made consenting choices to be sex workers resent being told that their profession is exploiting them, that they are colluding with their exploiters and that they are complicit in the exploitation of other women.

Recently in Melbourne there was an issue here when the Victorian Roller Derby League (VRDL) chose Project Respect as their annual charity. Project Respect does a lot of great work helping women who want to exit the sex industry and supporting trafficked women in the illegal industry here. However, they also have a blanket philosophy that the sex industry must all be ended as they believe it is innately bad. In the words of the projects creator

Project Respect “So much harm, so much heart-ache. And for what? At so high a price, what is gained? What could be worth subjecting human beings to such suffering, to exploitation that has repercussions for years and years to come? Stripped back to its core, the answer is simple, though we rarely talk about it. Women and children are delivered up, in their millions, to make sure that some men never have to contemplate being without someone to fuck, when they want, how they want, whenever they want. So weak a reason, so high a cost.”

This totally denies CONSENTING workers autonomy and refuses to acknowledge them at all as wanting this line of work or having any right to earn money in the career of their choice. It is a false logic used very often to push an ulterior agenda. For example rape does not make all sex bad. Violence in marriage does not make all marriage bad. Rape and violent marriages are common but no one is saying all men and women must stop having sex and all men and women must stop getting married. Slavery does not make all prostitution bad and making this claim alienates consensual sex workers from anti-slavery efforts of which they truly are allies and not enemies. So a lot of the VRDL supporters who are consensual sex workers in the industry and their friends, family and supporters reacted to this choice of charity because it is anti prostitution as well as anti-slavery, thus it is anti consenting prostitutes unless they’re exiting the industry. It is a very sad that this charity lost support for a cause that needs as much as it can get simply because it will not relinquish its bigotry towards consensual sex work. Yes bigotry, a lot of bigotry comes from painful life experience. I hated men for a while in my 20’s because I had been abused and raped by two men and I knew this was not an uncommon female experience. I had to resolve that prejudice not by ignoring the issue of male on female abuse but by forcing myself to acknowledge that not all men do this and that my prejudice would only hinder change not help it. I needed to recognize that there were MANY men out there who abhorred these behaviors and would never treat a woman like that who did not deserve to be prejudged and hated. I had to see that if I acknowledge these men and worked with them I had a better chance of changing these cultural issues.

It continues to sadden me that the divide between these two groups grows ever bigger. This schism isn’t specific to Melbourne either it is an issue in USA and Europe as well. This issue pits two groups against each other, sex positive sex workers and advocates and organizations that help exploited sex workers get out, who actually have the same goals; to end the abuse of sex workers and women in the sex industry. The way it is right now.. the only people really loosing from this battle of advocate ideologies are sex workers… not the criminals and exploiters but the workers either willing or coerced.

Beautiful Women

Posted on: April 5th, 2012 by Liandra 3 Comments

Samantha Brick is crumbling under the onslaught of contempt her original article and response article, about being hated because she is beautiful, have inspired. I read them and I’ll admit I thought the first was a parody piece, a joke. I had a good laugh which slowly trailed off to awkward silence as it dawned on my this was for real.

 

I can’t say for sure if Samantha has experienced discrimination from women who were threatened by her looks, or perhaps her attitude about her looks or perhaps her penchant for using her looks to get things out of men professionally with regard to her career. I’d say it’s very possible that some women have resented her being more attractive than them and also strategically flirtatious (as she freely admits)  is true. I also imagine there are a number of other reasons she has been shunned that she has falsely attributed to female envy. I don’t know though and neither does Samantha. It’s all conjecture she has made from scenarios she assumes were discrimination based on the comforting words of friends who told her that a woman is ‘just jealous of you’. Honestly, Sam did need to ask herself, who would say when asked “I think it’s because you’re incompetent and obnoxious that you were passed over for promotion”.

 

My own mild contempt for the quality of the article put aside, I have witnessed women closing ranks and excluding and dismissing a beautiful woman. I was once visiting a domestic violence woman’s shelter and this gorgeous, tall, blond client was admitted with her beautiful child. She wasn’t supermodel beautiful but she was a head turner with that particularly luminous blond hair and long legs. The other women were quite cruel to her and unwelcoming. I recall one woman said to her directly “what have you got to complain about, you’re beautiful, you could get any man you wanted”.  I pointed out this was the beauty and the fairytale myth that a woman’s beauty can turn a beast into a prince charming. I defended ‘Beauty’ further saying that her prettiness or beauty wasn’t a shield from a violent partner, nor would it make that experience any less painful for her. In reality, with jealousy being such a strong component of abusive relationships it could well have exacerbated situations for her with jealous partners.  No one was convinced and they got incredibly hostile when ‘Beauty’ said in her own defence “being beautiful doesn’t make my life easier with men, for a start it seems to me mean there are more men that want to treat me like shit”. The group noticeably bristled as if what she had said was “more men want me than you because I am more beautiful than you uglies”. It had never occurred to me before that there was quite a large social downside to being that very standard beautiful “tall, blonde, shapely and ultra femme”. It does sound like a privileged whinge when you hear attractive people complain about being attractive but then again this woman was shunned and isolated in a place where women were generally trying to support each other and forging friendships because they recognised a common trauma.

Now whether or not Samantha is delusional or speaking uncomfortable truth that women don’t want to face about how we treat each other I’ve nevertheless been stunned that the reaction was so very hateful. I wouldn’t have thought about this silly article for more than a second if it weren’t for the quite vicious responses. Women were insulting her looks and incensed by her belief in her own attractiveness. Her vanity may be a little cringe worthy but I can’t imagine what would drive someone to send her vicious hate mail because of it. That seems to be a rather large overreaction. Women are angry about this article for what looks like four reasons

1) She said she is beautiful and they find her unattractive.

2) She said she was beautiful and whether she is or not they find her vanity an conjecture to be crass.

3) She said women are mean to beautiful women.

4) She wrote an article that makes her and other women look absurd and petty.

 

Now I think the article is self involved dross with a whole lot of vain conjecture. I think this assisted greatly in loosing sight of the kernel of truth she actually may have had. Regardless, the hate that is being directed at her seems unwarranted and telling. Wherever there are mass reactions this strong you’ve got to ask why? So ladies, what made you so angry with Sam? Here are my theories.

 

1) She said she is beautiful and they find her unattractive (so they want her to feel as unattractive as they feel she is).

2) She said she was beautiful and whether she is or not they find her vanity an conjecture to be crass (so they want to teach her a lesson for being conceited).

3) She said women are mean to beautiful women (and they know that this does happen, that maybe once in their life they indulged in a little malicious bitchy envy based behaviour and their embarrassed that she’s prodded their guilty spot).

4) She wrote an article that makes her and other women look absurd and petty (they feel their gender has been publicly held up for ridicule and they’re pissed with her for providing the opportunity).

 

The truth is we are savage towards women about their looks ugly beautiful or anywhere in between. Sam Brick is certainly complaining about something legitimate but in a way that alienates her from other women and so is almost completely pointless and ineffectual… it is also looking at only one side of the issue because that part relates to her and her deliberately using her looks to get ahead of less attractive women in her career.

The Nice Guy or The Friend Category

Posted on: April 2nd, 2012 by Liandra 8 Comments

I’ve been noticing a fair amount of critiquing women over the last 15 years I’ve been an adult. Some of it is shere misogyny and some of it is about cultural stuff that women ‘generally’ perpetuate against men and against other women and so is fair enough. We are not beyond reproach of course.

However, I’ve been thinking recently about this rather over used concept that women reject nice guys and so they deserve it when they end up with arseholes. I’ve been trying to place it in either the misogyny or the legitimate critique category and I’ve decided it can be in either under different circumstances. Most of the time it’s a myth perpetuated by guys who are bitter about being rejected. The guys saying this aren’t actually ‘nice guys’ they’re just bitter that they didn’t get the woman they wanted and they’re playing victim.

 

Often times, women do, without warrant, mistreat men who desire them because culturally we’re told men don’t have more sensitive feelings and if they do then they’re not a ‘real man’. This is women perpetuating misandry that denies men the full spectrum of emotions and equal respect for their emotions and feelings as women expect. **This is a cis gendered heterosexual issue as far as I have experienced and witnessed it so forgive me for talking strictly in those terms**

So let me break it down for you guys and gals…

A guy being bitter, resentful and malicious simply because he was rejected is not a nice guy, he is being an arsehole.

A guy feeling offended not because a woman rejected him but because she did so by insulting, humiliating and/or demeaning him is rightfully critiquing poor behaviour (unless his advances were insulting, humiliating and/or demeaning when in which case you get back what you give out huh?). However, using this to disparage all women is sexist and bigoted and so if you’re going to insult an entire gender based on a few individuals you are still not a nice guy.

A guy who is a woman’s friend simply because he wants to bone her and then stops being her friend and insults her as soon as he knows she’s not going to fuck him is not a nice guy.

A guy who is a woman’s reliable friend regardless of also having a massive crush on the woman so she manipulates and uses him when she is single as she dangles the possibility of a relationship in front of him like a carrot to a donkey is going to be offended when he discovers he has been played and she drops his friendship the minute she finds someone she does truly want. **NOTE TO GUYS. JUST ASK HER OUT RIGHT IF SHE WANTS TO HAVE SEX OR DATE YOU THEN MOVE ON TO FRIENDSHIP WHEN SHE SAYS NO**

A woman who won’t date a guy if she is not attracted to him is not making a mistake, she is doing him a favour. Do men really want women to just settle for them without having any sexual attraction and then eventually start to cringe at the idea of sex with their partner?

Really though, surely it’s best for these women who behave negatively towards men not to want to date you if they don’t respect you. You should be feeling relief not resentment when you get a malicious knock back because you DODGED A BULLET.  Plus, if you’re using these general examples to justify hating all women or thinking all women are bitches then she DODGED A BULLET even if she was a bitch to you because you are a sexist bigot. This is all the same nonsense as saying ALL men are arseholes just because SOME of them will play you with sweet words into the sack or they abandon their children. Some women treat men badly, some men treat women badly. Learn from it and remove these people from you circles of friends. There are plenty of truly good people out there if you bother looking for them.

I found this on Kane’s blog which is worth reading also on the topic from a man’s perspective that this myth is about male self respect. I found it to be pretty damn accurate.