March 14, 2006

The Sum of Our Body Parts?

I've written about these things before here: Feminism, stupid women, dating and the games people play. The phoney business that involves everything SEX. Some of my fellow Cotillion sisters have been chatting about these things- feminism, women and our bodies- and modern American culture. The question of the week:
"Feminism was supposed to free women from outdated and demeaning gender stereotypes; to empower us as people and put us on a more equal footing with men. Yet now, when women have more education, money, and power than ever before, we seem to have surrendered to the very culture we once viewed as oppressive and sexist. Have we finally transcended sexism and if so, why aren't men jumping on the same bandwagon?

Will women ever view ourselves as more than the sum of our body parts?"

Feminists are their own worst enemies.

The feminist movement began in the bed of some poor woman who didn't experience her first orgasm until she was older. I'm convinced of this: Betty Friedman and her lot were self suppressed women who resented their lives. They didn't like being mothers, they didn't like keeping the home fires burning. They were bored with themselves and took it out on the men of their lives. They placed blame on men; they hated men, they spread lies and falshoods about men. One would think- WOMEN don't need MEN.
And they decided if THEY felt this way ALL women should feel this way.
The movement began. Bras were burned and sex became a freeforall expose of mega proportions.

Feminism and Sex
Breast enlargement, vaginal tightening (rejuevenation), labia nip and tucks, pubic hair shaving/waxing (some women actually use stencils to make fancy designs)...butt lifts, vaginal lip scultpuring name it, it can be done. For a relatively small price.

Actually many of these surgeries have been around for a long time. Vaginal tightening used to be done for bladder control problems- that's the name the procedure was given so there wasn't such a stigma. Nevermind that simple exercises could (and still can) be done to keep things quite tight. There's a new disease presenting itself to the world too, thanks to this: MRSA found in the vagina- which is caught in the dirtier clinics and hospitals where these operations take place. MRSA is passed on to men, condoms and all, as well as to the baby being born in the future.

Labia alterations is new and many women have had this procedure done only to end up aorgasmic: The snip took too much and cut nerves....Now she can't experience an clitoral orgasm. 2 out of every 200 procedures end up with this as a result. A nice looking labia that cannot feel a thing. Sweet.

The "movement" has done much for women now hasn't it? The old coots like Betty wanted SO much for women to be seen as anything but a set of boobs and a pussy. Where did it all go wrong? What is for sure is now, men see women in terms of boobs and legs and ass and vagina.

Feminists don't want women to need men. So much has been written about the mysterious clitoral orgasm that the true, really exquisite and uttery amazing orgasm we CAN experience with a MAN is almost unheard of. The kind of orgasm we get with being truly turned on, stimulated and which requires, *GASP*, a penile penetration!! Oh my.
Lesbian sex sucks- because they cannot replicate the really good sex that only a man and a woman can create. You won't hear about this in modern magazines though. Or from a feminsist.

Another lasting effect of the feminist movement (and this has gotten me into trouble here before) is the expectation upon women to always have an orgasm...when so many do NOT. They FAKE it though. Upwards of 90% of women do this on a regular basis. I would like to say that it is the feminists who do the faking most the time but I have no actual proof of that. I am pretty sure it's a fact though. Women are really good at acting out a sexual encounter as if it were the best they ever got.

They have good teachers though: Hollywood movies with the steamy sex scenes, porn, magazine articles. Women are expected to have a good time every time because men know what they are doing right? Who cares if the man has been lied to about his ability and skill. Who cares if every woman he has ever been with FAKED it. It's a nasty secret that just about every woman will deny til she drops dead. But it is fact and we all know it.

We are expected to go along with the lies and falshoods or else WE are seen as having a problem. We're COLD. Something is wrong with US. Bull shit! It's the big LIE of feminsim. All the porn and slutty ads we see on the TV and in magazines set us up, women, to be failures. It creates confidence problems. It creates realtionships that are depended upon porn as a jump start for sex. The average woman cannot compete with the plastic Barbies of the porn world. The average woman doesn't look like a bulemia-induced skin and bones super model. And the average woman shouldn't even try to live up to those (very low) standards.

The average woman, no every woman, should be proud of who she is-naturally. Every one of us has flaws and scars and other signs of a life well lived so far- these are to be worn with pride.

I am proud of my body.
I have never had any plastic surgery and never will. I am proud of my imperfections. My boobs are not huge but they are real; my vagina isn't a cherry but it's quite capable to bringing a man to the best orgasm he's ever had (because I know how to use IT right LOL) and it serves me extremely well when it comes to my own orgasms. I'm not self centered enough to actually look at my labia and lips and wonder......Is this good enough???

I like me as I am. I wouldn't change me for anyone. And if I'm not good enough for some men, it's their loss- not mine.

See RCat's take on this issue.

Posted by Raven at March 14, 2006 09:30 PM

Is it OK for a man to comment on your article? If not feel free to delete this.

My wife has at many times told me that she would like to have a little tummy tuck or a boob job but I don't want her to have anything "done." I have told her on many ocassions that if she feels she is too fat she needs to use the tread mill that I bought her. As far as the "other" cosmetic surguries are concerned, I am perfectly happy with her the way God made her and have been for twenty years of marriage.



Posted by: srvd8101 at March 15, 2006 05:04 AM

I think I understand what you are trying to say. I also understand the point women like Betty Friedan were making. What I gathered from them is that a woman does not have to think that she NEEDs a man in order to have a complete and full life. I think they were trying to say that you don't need to do the marriage and motherhood thing order to be a real woman. Its okay to date men and to get married. However, its unhealthy to totally give up your own identity in the process of those things. I think she was just trying to say that being a woman does not automatically select a woman for a role of subservience to a man. I think she was trying to say that a woman doesn't have deal with a man treating her like a servant and punching bag just because he thinks he reigns supreme. I also think that they just wanted women to realize their seuxality and be proud of it. Indeed, even to this day, female sexuality is associated with whoredom.

I definitely understand what you're saying, I think. Please help me if I'm wrong. I think you're saying, which I agree, that our free-spirited seuxal liberation has worked against because the media has seized it as an opportunity to further seuxally objectify women. Moreover, its given men license to twist the meaning of the women's lib movement in order to further exploit women and maintain their male chauvinist views. Indeed, its also given them another way to manipulate women on an individual level, because they tell us that they like a strong, liberated woman, yet they still have the same mentality of associating female sexuality with whoredom. They still view sex as some sort of rite of passage from boyhood to manhood. Now that we're living in a civilized society where they no longer just have do the things that their primal instincts thrive on like hunting, women along with sports have replaced the these of venues of carnal pleasure which make them "feel like a man". They have always had a sexual conquest-type mentality about women, however as society has become more advanced, their need to fulfill their primal instincts has been increasingly focused on women.

I think I'm in agreement with you, because I also think the vanity of our own self-love and liberation has started working against us , because men have began to use our vanity and rebelliousness against us. I think that may have been the unintended latent function of the women's lib movement. The only time men get at odds with us is when they can't use or manipulate us in any way beneficial to them by controlling our minds. Thats when they put their hands on us and try to make us feel and behave the way they want us to. Otherwise, men don't care what we do as long as its benefical to them. They'll go with the flow with the flow of whatever we want to do as long as they can have a controlling influence over what we do. They want this control, because in nature men and women are one another's biggest competitors for resources and ultimate Earthly power and control. They don't want things to be equal, because it'd mean less of the pie for them. They use the fashion, beauty and at times the health & fitness industries to distract us from seeing what's REALLY going on around us, because we'll be too wrapped up in ourselves trying to control or eliminate those things deemed to be flaws by those entities,lol. As far as sex goes, in nature its the common bond that ties men and women. Sex is the innate, instinctual thing that brings the sexes together. This is why men place so much emphasis on sex in society, especially in regards to a woman's place in society. Not all men are this way, but alot of them are. This is why I think its important for women to be united on all fronts, especially when it comes to dealing with men. United we stand, divided we fall. We can't turn on each other all for the sake of having a man or being viewed favorably in their eyes. When male views attack one of us, we should all be offended if only for the sake of unity. Indeed, men don't tear each other to shreds to the point that it divides them on the whole.

Posted by: Rita at March 15, 2006 01:51 PM


I don't see it as an Us vs. Them proposition.

The problem with radical feminism is that it threw the baby out with the bathwater. Decent men like my husband who were raised to defer to ladies say, "Hey - fine. If you want to be equal, why should I put you on a pedestal?"

Which is just fine with me. But then feminists like Nancy Hopkins demand not equality, but special treatment for women! Major double standard, and this creates justified resentment in men. There are situations - pregnancy is one of them, many sexual situations are another - that leave a woman vulnerable and in need of protection. If men aren't trained to take responsibility and shelter women, who will?

Men can be wonderful and noble and fine and they can be predatory and somewhat bestial. If we shame them when they try to be noble, should we be surprised when they revert to less desireable behaviors?

If we tell women its OK celebrate their inner slut, how on earth can we blame men for mistaking them for whores? After you've layered on the low-cut blouse, Miracle Bra, the Pheremones parfum, and the rhinestone thong, it's just a tad disingenuous to go all virginal and white picket fence on the poor guy and say "No means No, you big brute!". :)

Posted by: Cassandra at March 15, 2006 05:40 PM


First of all, I was applying the theory of social darwinism to gender relations as it pertained to the women's liberation movement or as you simplistically put it,"Us vs. Them". Its a sociological competition theory. I used this theory as a way to address the author's question of,"Have we finally transcended sexism and if so, why aren't men jumping on the same bandwagon?". I only said that it was what I THOUGHT. I didn't say it was the gospel truth or couldn't be disproved. I was really only asking the author if my interpretation of what she said was correct. Then, I also stated my thoughts in addition, which is where I applied the sociological theory.

You have a husband. You say he's good. FINE. I did not attack marriage. I attacked the idiocy of the subservient role that women HAD traditionally been expected to take in society. Nobody attacked your husband. In fact, I said, "all men are not like this" - meaning all men aren't chauvinists or control freaks. I was saying that a woman shouldn't need a man, as in need a man in order to survive period. People need people regardless of gender at some point. However, a woman shouldn't think any less of herself or her goodness or success as a woman if she doesn't have a man. Its okay to have a man or want one. I never said anything was wrong with that. However, thinking less of yourself and your capabilities as a woman, because you don't have a man is emotionally unhealthy. Indeed, suppose you have a husband and he dies on you and you never meet anyone else or no one else wants to marry you - then what? All you'd have is you. Why would you not be good enough for you?

I wish you had read what I said a little better, or maybe you just want someone to know that you have a husband. If you would have actually read my post, you'd have seen that I ALSO don't believe in special treatment for women at all. However it sounds to me like you do since you actually said, "There are situations - pregnancy is one of them, many sexual situations are another - that leave a woman vulnerable and in need of protection. If men aren't trained to take responsibility and shelter women, who will?" How about other capable women who aren't pregnant, lol? Do you think we're too stupid to know how to help one another? Suppose your husband is at work or out of town and you go into labor early - what would you do? Since the beginning of time, there have been women who have had babies all on their own. During slavery here in the U.S., the pregnant slaves often gave birth right there in the field while working. They just squatted and pushed then went back to work. This was a horrible practice, but it happened. The only thing I can see a pregnant woman may need a man to protect her from is another man. He should also drive her to the hospital when she's in labor. However, she could just call 911 or a cab. We shouldn't have to train a man to do anything unless he's our son. Men are adults. Many of them actually think they know more than us. Many of us think they know more than us. Remember, they are the ones who define what a lady and a woman is. They have told us what we should be like and how we should look. Since they know so well about what a woman should be and how she should think and feel,there's no need to train a man anything about his role as a man, because he should already know that too. My biggest problem issue is the control factor. I am a full grown Adult. No spouse or partner, regardless of sex, has any business trying to control me in any capacity. I'm glad that I have enough respect for myself to stand up for me. You damn right, I do have an issue about how much control a man should have in a relationship. It wasn't long ago (1990s) that a man could get away with raping his wife, because it was legal. In the 1970s and prior, a man could legally beat his wife as if she was his child. She was viewed as his property. There women that died from severe beatings from their husbands. Even though there were laws against spousal abuse, many jurisdictions did not recognize and enforce them.

MY point about the whole celebrating our sexuality is that a woman should never be ashamed of her sexuality. In case you didn't know, there's a difference between sexual pride/freedom and being a whore. First, a whore is a prostitute. I said that a woman's sexuality was equated with whoredom, because of scrutiny that sex endured as a result of the puritanical ideologies that once dominated this society, especially in regards to a woman's role and place in society. A woman should not let what a man would think of her affect her mind to the degree that she alters her whole entire personality, goals, aspirations and needs. She shouldn't become an altruistic asexual, simply because of a fear that a man would think she's a whore or nasty slut if she enjoys sex. Now you may not know this, but there was a point in society where a woman's sexual needs in her marriage were considered unimportant and indecent. There was a time when men expected their wives to just lay there, because anything else would have been considered indecent. Matter of fact, during the Victorian era for example, whenever a woman was anything less than a quiet mouth and smiling face she was deemed to be suffering with hysteria. The treatment was that she had to go to the doctor who'd then stimulate her sexual organs manually until he felt she was calm. Doctors considered this job to be beneath them and tiring, so they'd get a nurse to sexually stimulate the woman. The vibrator was invented as a relief aid for the doctor or nurse to use when they had to perform this "daunting" task. If the woman's episodes of malaise and discontent didn't improve, she got sent to an insane asylum.

My last point is this - there are women who do not dress sexually provacative or give ANY sexual innuendos to a man about anything that still get raped. Further, there are women who do not dress sexually provacative or give ANY sexual innuendos to a man about anything that still get put down and demeaned when they didn't freely have casual sex with a guy just because he asked - they are called prudes, ugly b*tches and feminazis. Thats your whole "training a man" theory out of the window right, because I KNOW society trains a man not to rape a woman. With some - maybe even most men - you are damned if you do and you are damned if you don't as far as sex is concerned, so why care about what they think? It makes more sense to make the decisions that you are going to feel good and comfortable with at the end of the day or night, rather than be overly altruistic towards a man or male ideology and sacrifice one's sanity and identity in the process. In other words, if you want to have sex, do it with caution(be fully aware of the potential outcomes of the situation) - if you don't want to have sex, don't have sex. You should care about what you think first and foremost, especially if that man isn't your husband.

Kudos to the man that posted above me. He's a good man! He's wise.

Posted by: Rita at March 16, 2006 03:13 AM