(no subject)

[highlyeccentric]

If Hitler had had the right orgasms the Holocaust would never have happened.

Germaine Greer, with typical heavy-handedness, attacks Fay Weldon, the female orgasm, men, and everything in between. So far as I can tell, her position on all of these things is that they are wrong.

ed: no wait, she came good on page two:

Fay Weldon is probably right to say that sex without orgasm can be perfectly pleasurable, but making love is even more deeply satisfying than simply having sex, with the female orgasm as an optional extra.

rounding off, of course, with this nice peice of snark:

Weldon is certainly right to say that there is no point in a woman demanding an orgasm from her man. If an orgasm is what she wants, rather than intimacy, there’s always the Rabbit.

Comments

[flamearrows.livejournal.com]

The most irritating thing about that article is the generalisation. Why is it so hard to believe that a couple could have sex with both intimacy and multiple-orgasmic joy (at least, on the part of the female)?

Not to mention, blind man-hatred is boring. Didn't anyone tell Greer that it's, like, so passe to hate everything with a penis?

[highlyeccentric.livejournal.com]

Why is it so hard to believe that a couple could have sex with both intimacy and multiple-orgasmic joy

i suspect because many people don't... i'm sure some people do, the first comment in the blog below is in defence of multiple and mutual orgasms. but worrying women people expect or are expected to produce unrealistic orgasm levels is the new In Thing circulating amonst elderly feminists, so far as i can tell.

Didn't anyone tell Greer that it's, like, so passe to hate everything with a penis
i don't think anyone's game to :p

Honi Soit produced an archive edition a few weeks back, with articles from various editions going back to the foundation of that most august publication. There was an impressive 70s feminist article entitled 'discover your clitoris', in which, among other things, the author got stuck into traditional psychology which declared women were frigid if they didn't achieve vaginal orgasm. Nono- apparently it's because penises are penetrative symbols of power! women who aren't scared or angered by them have internalised the patriarchy!
gah.

[flamearrows.livejournal.com]

With your extensive experience of human sexual relationships? :P

[admittedly, my sample size is only marginally higher...]

But seriously, I think the base thing about the whole feminist approach to interpersonal relationships that irks me is that it assumes that men and women simply cannot - or will not - actually devise a solution to an unsatisfying relationship, sexual or otherwise. Feminism reads like a litany of excuses for why relationships are doomed to fail - starting with the premise that men are pigs and working our way up to our failure to take account of sexual needs etc...

[highlyeccentric.livejournal.com]

my extensive experience is nil... and if the feminists are right i think i'll keep it that way :p

that's just the thing that annoys me... if sex is as unpleasant as they portray it, it's not worth me ever bothing to have it, is it?

[flamearrows.livejournal.com]

Maybe it's just me being male, but I'm having trouble envisaging sex being awful more than once or twice :P

Why not test those feminist's claims empirically? Jump a nice guy and find out for yourself :P

[highlyeccentric.livejournal.com]

i don't mean physically awful, i mean such a nasty mess of powerplay.

because it would give said feminists too much satisfaction, to see me breaking out of the patriarchal religious values i've been brought up on. can't give them that kind of joy.

[flamearrows.livejournal.com]

teehee, good use of rationalisation.

I also wonder about the powerplay aspect. Perhaps I'm simply a hopeless romantic (and thus incompatible with that sort of ideology) but is it so hard to think that two people could work that sort of thing out? If relationships founded purely on sex is your thing, then sure, I can see it being a problem, but don't most relationships start with an ability to talk to the other person? Surely that's at least a leg-up to dealing with the problems that are always going to plague that sort of intimacy...

Yawn. I'm turning into an idealist.

[highlyeccentric.livejournal.com]

I'm turning into an idealist.

Lloyd, what's happening to you? this is nearly as disillusioning as finding out you'd abandoned cynical singlehood...

[flamearrows.livejournal.com]

Well, you can slot that illusion back into place since I'm at least back to singlehood...

Maybe that makes my arguments all the sadder since I am without a lovey-dovey partner :P

[highlyeccentric.livejournal.com]

see, non-cynical singlehood might be so much healthier for you, but you had such a great reputation for cynicism!