Last week, our fellow blogger Liza brought to our attention a very in-depth and thought-provoking article at The Frisky on the topic of sex positivity.
Wait a minute, you may be saying. You always write about sex positivity, and being sex positive. But what exactly does that mean? Excellent question, and admittedly not the easiest one to answer. I’ll wager that for many sex positives, sex positivity is something that cannot be easily defined, but one knows it when one sees it. That’s certainly the case for Jill and I. Additionally, while we know sex positivity when we see it, we also know sex negativity when we see that. Attempting to smear a Georgetown law student because she uses birth control? That’s sex negativity.
I guess it’s not as complicated as I’m making it sound. Sex positivity is exactly that: The notion that sex is a positive, healthy thing, unworthy of the negative attitudes and taboos that it seems to engender throughout most of society, or at least American society. It’s the attitude that any sexual activity involving consenting adults is beneficial to its participants, and by extension to society as a whole. Or at least, that’s how we’ve always viewed it.
It was for that reason that we were particularly interested in writer Rachel Rabbit White’s thoughts on the topic. After all, while we consider ourselves extremely sex-positive, who knows if that’s really the case? We aren’t authorities on the subject, nor are we the gatekeepers who control its definition. Plus, we enjoy The Frisky; if you don’t read them, or follow them on Twitter, you’re missing out.
The article is entitled “8 Ways To Be Positive You’re Sex Positive“, and for the most part it consists of rational, common sense points about what does and does not constitute sex-positivity. Well, maybe “common sense” isn’t the right term. In fact, I’m certain that it’s not. But I wish it was. I wish more people could read this article and relate to it. In fact, scratch that. What I really wish was that sex positivity was so prevalent that this article didn’t need to actually be written in the first place, and that my fellow sex bloggers and I were instead abuzz with discussion about a groundbreaking article on whether reverse cowgirl beats traditional cowgirl.
It occurred to us, before reading the article, that we might find out that something we’ve been doing is not conducive to true sex positivity. We imagined having to change our habits lest we be branded sex-negative. We imagined being ostracized from the sex blogosphere by an angry, torch-and-pitchfork wielding mob. We imagined shutting down our blog and launching a mainstream parenting blog where we debate the merits of carrot sticks as the perfect after-school snack. Okay, that’s an exaggeration. We imagined none of those things. But we did wonder if perhaps our philosophy of sex positivity differed from that presented in the article. And in a way, it does.
While we can agree wholeheartedly with most of the points the article presents, we took issue with the second one, entitled “Stop glamorizing sex.” Essentially, the author suggests that sex positive writers, in describing their sometimes prodigious sex lives, take on a haughty position over their readers, and can even be accused of boasting about the sex they have. “Talking about your sex life as if it’s better than someone else’s is glamorizing sex, and that doesn’t move the dialog forward…glamorizing helps cement the idea that sex all the time should be the goal instead of knowing your desire levels and honoring those.”
The assumptions made by the author in reference to this point are numerous. She infers pressure among sex positives to discuss their sex lives in a superior fashion. She interprets this superiority as bragging, admitting that she conducted herself in the same fashion when she was in high school and apparently assuming that those who talk frankly about their sex lives do the same. She assumes also that those who write positively about their sex life have a goal of “sex all the time”, rather than honoring their level of desire. She doesn’t acknowledge that, for some, “sex all the time” might actually reflect their level of desire.
In writing this blog, it’s never really occurred to us that people having what the author refers to as “regular” sex (whatever that means; in the context of the article it seems to mean unhealthy sex) or no sex whatsoever might be jealous of us. Sure, we’ve received the occasional comment from a reader who claimed to be envious of our antics, but we took them to be meant at least partially in jest. It never crossed our mind that anyone who expressed a measure of envy for our sex life could be serious. We suppose that this narrow-mindedness could fuel the author’s theory that we are not actually sex positive; our inability to empathize with our readers might actually push us into the “sex negative” camp.
Understand that if that’s the case, it’s not a label we willingly accept. We’ve never sought to inspire feelings of inadequacy but rather titillation. We want our readers to enjoy the stories we post and the pictures we share, regardless of whether they’re having good sex, bad sex, or none at all. If we come off as the sort of bloggers who use this space to compensate for our failings by drumming into the heads of our readers how much more satisfying our sex life is than theirs, then we sincerely apologize. We’re not interested in alienating anyone, nor are we trying to “wow” them to the extent that they feel inferior. What could we possibly gain from that?
It sounds like Rachel Rabbit White considers an active, varied sex life a healthy and positive thing. But, perplexingly, she seems to also be saying that writing about such a sex life in the manner that it deserves is not okay, and that our enthusiasm for the sex we have should be toned down in our writing, so as not to make anyone feel bad. While we try to be sensitive to the feelings of those around us – indeed, we have voiced our fear of sounding like “arrogant jerks” with regard to our short-lived Sunday Scoreboard feature – the thought that we should handcuff ourselves in this manner clearly stems from unchecked political correctness. This treads dangerously close to sex negativity, in our opinion.
As I commented on Liza’s post, we blog honestly about the sex that we have, and we don’t make excuses or apologize for any of it. We simply don’t believe that our readership at large finds an apology necessary. We assume that those who frequent our blog enjoy what we share, and are perhaps – or should I say hopefully – actually aroused by it. That’s a large part of our motivation for blogging, and we don’t know that we are willing to change our blogging strategy just to claim a seemingly-arbitrary “sex positive” designation.
We will continue to write frankly about our sex life, and post pictures whenever possible. If the fact that the sex life about which we write is rich and diverse makes us sex-negative, whether in the eyes of Rachel Rabbit White or society as a whole, that’s a label we’ll just have to wear.
Don’t let my objection to the article’s second point dissuade you from reading it. It’s overall an excellent read, and even if you disagree with most or all of it – something I doubt – it still provides great food for thought. Check it out.
-Jack