 |
| source |
A few days ago, some friends and I were talking about how our mutual pal is lucky to have found a guy who is patient and happy to wait for her comfort level with sexual activity to increase. He's not pushy and seems to really like and care for her, waiting several months (so far) to Do It.
 |
| source |
For females, I consider the right to say a loud enthusiastic "YES" or a strong and simple "NO" to every sexual encounter to be extremely empowering and a basic right, and I have had no trouble respecting sexual limits with women. Men are, of course, are endowed with that same right to say no. But is it a double standard that I would not be willing to wait for or be patient with a male partner in the same way that I would with a female? I think it is. I think it also indicates some cultural conditioning that sex is just "not a big deal" for men in the way that it can be for some women, and that on some level I've bought into the cultural myth that men want pussy always and forever, and that their desire to wait is somehow strange or less legitimate than a woman's. Regardless, everyone should have the right to state and stick to their limits without any sway or pressure, and I need to be a leeeeetle more conscious of the way I perceive male sexuality.
Whatcha think? Am I just a dick or is this something you've found yourself thinking too?
Much love,
The Sheriff
how about "how the roles we live can rube on both sides of the paradigm: A Man Who Waits" by the Sheriff
ReplyDeleteHow does having sex be a necessary part of a relationship make you a jerk? If spending large amounts of time with someone you are attracted to and actively want to have sex with is physically uncomfortable and/or unrewarding, why would you extend that process, potentially indefinitely? Ultimatums are almost always a bad idea, but we all have 'dealbreakers' and/or things we need out of a relationship. Not being ready to/not wanting to have sex with me is a dealbreaker for me, irrespective of gender. And I see nothing wrong with that.
ReplyDeleteI do consider sex a necessary and lovely part of my relationships, which isn't inherently wrong in and of itself. I think the reason I find it douche-y is that I have different standards for men and women in the regard. I'd wait/be more patient for a female partner. For a man? Ehh, not so much. And that's why I think I'm a jerk.
ReplyDelete--The Sheriff
I don't even think of "several months" as waiting, especially if there's plenty of sex but happens to be no intercourse. People move at their own paces with these things, and not having intercourse for the first few months (or year, or ever) is totally natural for some people, and has nothing to do with religion, or discomfort, or previous experiences. Men should be allowed that room as much as anyone else. Given how much pressure they face to act like horndogs all the time, I think a lot of them would find it a relief to know that there's no pressure from the get-go.
ReplyDeleteIt is important that the two people involved are on roughly the same page in terms of their needs being met, so if you need a certain sex act and can't satisfy it on your own or with outside partners, and aren't willing to be patient, then yeah, end the relationship. It's better for both of you. Your partner's gender/sex really shouldn't be a factor in that decision.
Oooh I came across an example of how this cultural conditioning happens:
ReplyDeletehttp://thesocietypages.org/socimages/2011/01/24/the-double-standard-in-sexualizing-teen-celebrities/
It's about Justin Bieber in sexyish(?) photos in Vanity Fair, including women pawing over him and grabbing his tie, and with his shirt open. From the post: "I think it’s safe to say that if Miley Cyrus, or another female teen star, posed in photos that showed evidence of being kissed or grabbed by male fans, people would be up in arms about the sexualization of girls. But as we often see, there’s a double-standard, based on the idea that boys are naturally sexual at earlier ages and that boys are sexually invincible."