Over the years’, feminism has been leaning toward a sex-negative position. I’ve always wanted to see our culture become one that looks at sex as a positive thing and not one that tries to change it.
We live in a culture where one’s sexual preference and openness to sexuality is considered taboo. That sort of rhetoric of “slut-shaming” and telling others to abstain from fornication is to be expected from the highly religious.
The premise of divinity is something that I object, and thus enjoy the pleasures of women in both sexual conduct and in sight.
The later part of that sentence is where I can see many college educated feminists frown upon and see it as “problematic.” Many believe that to truly live in a sex-positive society the female body must be desexualized.
This line of thinking ends up critiquing particular aspects of our culture such as strip clubs, pornography — and one of the world’s oldest lines of work, prostitution. Legalize it!
I recently read a column by a colleague of my Karla Enriquez, wherein she wrote on the not so recent Vanity Fair article about Emma Watson and the backlash it received for showing a bit of the tit.
The outcry against her was to discredit her feminism. Enriquez condemned the backlash, and rightly so.
However, it was while reading her call to action when my objection arose; “women’s chests need to be desexualized instead of being shamed for the way women choose to express themselves through clothing.”
The initial part of that statement is what I’m objecting to. If the highly religious would have found a way to desexualize any part of the woman, they would have done so a long time ago. Nothing would make them happier than to completely abolish the temptation of the flesh.
But even the religious have an understanding that our lustful characteristics can not be undone. It is innate, in other words: It’s within our nature. Their reaction is to shy away from it and label it a “sin,” a divine sickness (if you will).
I say nay. Let us embrace our nature and understand that it isn’t “problematic” or a “sin,” it can not be cured or deconstructed. It is there not just for pleasure but more importantly, reproduction.
Without the lustful and sexual character of our species, the chances of our survival would be close to none. The same could be said for any animal and its preferred sexual characteristics.
This sort of feminist rhetoric makes the exact same mistake the religious do, and that’s to fight against nature. This fight will only lead to self-hatred, especially for men.
I urge my feminist colleagues, and those who fight for human rights, not to fall into the same trap the religious fell into.
Don’t tell men (or anyone for that matter) that their sexual desires are something that can be fought against or unlearned.
Do not become sex-negative.
