On Being Tied Up, and Liking It

[Trigger warning for a depiction of rape and a discussion of bondage play.]

The other night I had the following funky dream. It consisted of two parts. Part 1 involved me in my own apartment (possibly my current one) but there was a man, an older established man, dressed in a business suit. I didn't see his face, but I knew that he was going to rape me. The act wasn't depicted in the dream, but I remember feeling terrified. He was lurking in the apartment in a predatory way and possibly undressing. I was dressed, I think, but I was in bed, feeling vulnerable. There was a distinct feeling of danger, panic, disempowerment, and fear. The possibility of him approaching me, forcing me to have sex with him when I didn't want to, was not sexy; it was assaultive.

Part 2, a distinctly separate scenario in the same dream, involved a short scene in which a man (no one in particular, actually; he was more of an amorphous though definitely male presence) was dominating me in a sexy play. I think I was tied to an indoor railing of some sort, and no sex was actually going on. Rather, he was near me and I felt completely submitted to his dominant character. I was fully entrusting and in fact letting go of any fear. There was not a slightest hint of danger in the air; all I felt was a pleasurable calmness and safe surrender.

Source

I know that at least light forms of bondage have long entered the sex talk in pop culture: fuzzy handcuffs, blindfolds, black leather. But as a feminist, I was reluctant to accept such gendered play–specifically when the man dominates and the woman submits–in my own sex life. There was something I liked about the trust and surrender of these scenarios, but it still felt completely counterintuitive. Wouldn't I be letting down my fellow sisters who continued to advocate for women's voices and "no means no" campaigns?

I think this dream was my instinctive answer, a communication about something I probably already knew. I was confabulating the two scenarios in my reasoning, but here I was able to feel, on a visceral level, their stark difference: the fear and helplessness on the one hand, and the assured succumbing on the other. Consent, trust, and communication are key elements of dream part 2, and there is nothing unfeminist about that. Conversely, there is nothing feminist about policing our own sexualities and being afraid to ask for the things we want. Through this I realized that actually, all things (pleasurable) are possible in a caring, responsive, and egalitarian partnership.

Teen Motherhood

Today is Mother's Day and so I wanted to make a mom-related confession: after long restless days on the front lines of a city-funded mental health clinic, I sometimes come home to watch "Teen Mom 2". This show follows four teenage mothers who had been featured previously on "16 and Pregnant", now getting a deeper perspective into the realities of teen motherhood. Both of these shows have sucked me in with their voyeuristic and sociological appeals. There is something masochistic and fascinating about following their usually heart-wrenching stories from afar. Watching these girls go through their trials and tribulations is an emotional roller-coaster, and it also raises for me a few thoughts and some concerns that I decided to bring up here:

* Birth Control: One of the biggest acclaims of these shows seems to be their discussion on the use of birth control among teens. And as a member of a privileged and educated class, I'll admit I agree with these discussions. Because many forms of birth control are now readily accessible to most teens and there are hardly any excuses for not using them! These shows do well in using peers to tell each other to use protection, because what teen wants to listen to their parents talk about sex (parents should still talk to their teens about sex!). These shows are often seen as cautionary tales to the population of MTV teen viewers.

On the other hand, it becomes clear that condoms are gone from the sexual lives of the youth, and the pill is in. Many stories revolve around girls who were on antibiotics while taking the pill rendering it ineffective or they forgot to take the dose on the day of sex, and none discuss why condoms were not used. This saddens me. I mean, women rightfully fought for the pill in order to take control of their sexualities and pregnancy, but this seems to have taken all responsibility off the guys in the long run. Boys are no longer taught to wrap their junk, and as soon as parents (mothers?) hear that their daughter is sexually active, they take her to Planned Parenthood (hopefully, anyway). Does anyone talk to either sons, and daughters also, about condoms, which should still be used as pregnancy and STD protection. But this is still an unfair and dangerous gender role.

* Women on TV: Quite obviously, these shows focus on the girls' journeys through pregnancy and parenthood. On one hand, these shows, as I said, are cautionary tales for girls as many of the show participants urge their peers to wait to have kids and instead focus on their educations and careers. However, I wonder what images about womanhood, motherhood, female development, sexuality, and adulthood these girls, and boys too, are learning from TV. When I think about shows like Jersey Shore, Teen Mom, and Glee, I really question where the positive role models are?

* Fatherhood: This topic is a big one and maybe should wait for Father's Day to be discussed. But seriously, as with the role of men in birth control, where are all the fathers? Why aren't we having more discussions on the role of teen fatherhood, especially when everyone knows that the bailing father is a real societal problem. Why isn't there a "Teen Dad" show? This issue is, of course, more complicated, but it is nonetheless infuriating. Especially because no one says a word about it, and only going along with it as if it is a given.

* Infantilizing: I always get annoyed at the kiddish drawings (teddy bears, bright baby bottles) during the opening credits and in the middle of the show. These could pertain to the babies on the show, but I think the idea is also that the teen moms are still babies themselves. This may be true, but why are we treating them as infantile? They are mothers, and each has her own way in which she is growing into womanhood. The kid spiff is completely unnecessary.

* Reality and Stigma: In the end, the reality of teen motherhood as portrayed on the show is quite grueling. It becomes painfully clear that these girls just can't do this alone. The ones that make it, the ones who are able to graduate high school, have a job and make enough to afford an apartment and baby expenses, the ones that maybe even make it to college (I already mentioned that I come from an education bias), they are the ones who have an enormous amount of support around them. They need physical, emotional, and financial support. They need people willing to babysit, they need people willing to pay for things sometimes, they need people willing to listen and not judge. The stigma out there is still great, and these women and their children need our endorsement and respect. No one can make it alone.

Rape is rape in all colors and shapes

The semester is almost over, and then, we will have all sorts of feminist issues to discuss. But in the meantime, two pieces in the news caught my attention recently and warranted a brief pause from writing, grading, and researching to mention here.

One is the Rape is Rape campaign. Turns out, people in government are trying to change the definition of rape to mean only forcible rape. They argue that it is too hard to prove whether someone really said "No", and thus, rape victims must prove that sexual activity was truly forced on them. Clearly, this definition is absurd for so many reasons, including the fact that even force is hard to prove sometimes, non-bruise-leaving acts are still violating and wrong, "No" always means "No", even if one is gently coercing sex, etc.

So please support the protection of all people (mostly women, but some men, too) against sexual violence. Let's all enjoy sex consensually and responsibly.

Secondly and unrelatedly, as I was reading various comments regarding the rape issue, I came across this one. Readers had gone on a tangent about why the Women's Issues banner on the Huffington Post website is pink.

GraniteSkyline

Commented 1 day ago in Impact

“I hate pink, but when I wear it my husband is nicer to me (he doesn't realize he treats me differently). When I have had a hard day at work I come home and slip into my pink sweats and not only is there no whining from him but he will cook dinner and serve it to me at my desk! The color has power!”

Interesting, isn't it? Hooray for this woman's self-awareness or it never would have entered my attention either. But it got me thinking that, huh it's true, there is something disarming about a pink bathrobe/sweats since we tend to associate pink with femininity and femininity with weakness and tenderness. It makes sense that this simple act portrays the attitude of "please take care of me", whereas maybe slipping into a black hoodie with skull and bones on it would get a response of, "get your own damn dinner". Who knows, but in any case, here is another reason why I hate anything girl-related being encoded entirely in pink.

Let's talk about (heterosexual) sex

So, I have been in Mexico (and then all around California) for the last two months. And boy, do I have all sorts of things about Mexican sexism to discuss. Besides getting whistled at on the street like a dog by policemen on a daily basis, I have been observing the rigid gender roles and blatant forms of oppression that no one wanted to talk about (much less the women). And, of course, in my experience, this doesn't apply just to Mexico, but to most of the world (if not, all of the world). This ordeal of the summer has been right up my alley, though, as I was finishing up a project of gender roles/identities of women who grew up during the Soviet Union. Fascinating findings, indeed.

But let me direct your attention to the sexism that still prevails here in our good ol' American patriarchy. Shockingly, perhaps, it's the kind of subtle misogyny that gets transmitted to women by other women. Here it is in the form of a magazine sex advice column:

Cosmo's 75 Crazy-Hot Sex Moves
So this is an article (remember: by women, for women) that is supposed to enhance our libido and stir up our bedsheets, and yet the first 10, if not more, points there are about how to please the man. Put bands around his penis, put a mirror so he can see you going down on him (as if receiving a blow job is not enough?), put your legs over here and then there so he can get more stimulation, twist your body this way and that way, but don't fall off the bed (or god forbid, he might be left unsatisfied)!

There is a trick I learned recently, to check for possible inequality in situations. And this trick is to ask, "Whom does it benefit?" I'd have to say from this article, it ain't women's sexualities that are benefitting here. I guess this is a pet peeve of mine, our lack of understanding, respect, and appropriate teaching tools about female sexuality. Sadly, there are no "how to give her the pleasure of her life" articles among car and sport ones in men's magazines. Many men tend to learn about sex from porn these days, and we all know whom porn benefits (hint: again, it ain't female sexuality). And us? More than 50 years after the Kinsey report, I still meet many women who don't know the difference between a clitoris and a G-spot, or who frequently do not orgasm during intercourse.

So ladies, I beg you, forget about that sex position that gets at his penis at just the right angle. Go explore your bodies and teach yourselves (and later him) what feels great, and demand an equally satisfying place in bed.