that defines women's sexual lives in men's terms. From this view, women must separately identify our own sexual needs as women in order to discover those needs, cherish them, and pursue them. Cultural feminists remind us that too many women are dissatisfied with a promiscuous sex life whose casual nature quickly becomes perfunctory, shallow, and boring. Sex lacking in intimacy leaves many women feeling empty and alone. According to cultural feminists, this dissatisfaction is because women are seeking sexual pleasure that is male-defined, not female-defined. From this view, women who say they find butch/femme sex or sadomasochistic sex to be erotic have been coopted by a patriarchal sexual value system that encourages the degradation of women as the sexual slaves of men. At the very least, according to a cultural feminist, women must equalize the heterosexual power dynamics conducive to patriarchy in order to realize our sexual potential as women. For a cultural feminist, citing mutual consent is no guarantee of mutual respect for each sexual partner in a society that continues to deprive women of access to real sexual alternatives by labeling women "frigid" or "slut" when we do not live up to the male sexual ideal. Furthermore, it is argued that the so-called adventure that sex radicals advocate can lead to unwanted pregnancy, sexual violence, disease, and death. 35 Ignoring these facts about women's sexual lives only reinforces women's invisibility as sexually autonomous beings with our own sexual agenda. According to cultural feminism, unless we put the spiritual and personal elements back into sex, women will continue to lead lives of sexual fear, frustration, and dissatisfaction.
Page 43
The controversy between cultural and sex radical feminists outlined here took shape in the aftermath of the sexual revolution of the 1960s and early 1970s. While it is too generalized a description of the debate to capture some of the more subtle distinctions among various radical factions, it nevertheless captures some of the deeper rifts that continue to divide feminist approaches to women's sexuality as we enter the twenty-first century: does identifying male heterosexual sex as essentially dehumanizing to women liberate women to demand our own sexual needs, or does it reinforce women's identity as the sexual victims of men? Just how important is the oppression of women to women's sexuality, and how important is the oppression of sexuality to women's sexuality? Can women define sexuality in our own terms when what we have learned about our sexuality is itself a function of its social location under patriarchy? 36 Suppose we could show that promiscuous "cruising" sex could be , although it need not be, the kind of intimate, caring, and emotionally satisfying sex that a cultural feminist values. If we can loosen sexual exclusivity's stranglehold on care and respect in sex, then the promiscuity option that sex radical feminists want can satisfy the cultural feminist's requirement that good sex for women be sex that treats women as the subjects, not the objects, of our sexual experience. We would then have satisfied the desire of both groups that women's sex be defined in women's terms. In so doing, we can lay the foundation for a sexual ethic from the "view from somewhere different," an ethic that would encourage a sex radical's pursuit of sexual exploration without mirroring the heterosexual subordination of women by men that cultural feminism's demand for sexual intimacy is meant to preclude. Such an ethic could thus unify, not divide, the feminist vision of women as the agents and self-defining subjects of our sexual lives.
When cultural feminists say they value sexual intimacy, they seem to have at least three values in mind: (1) the private nature of the sex; (2) the personal nature of the sex; and (3) the comfort through trust in one's sexual partner. Can promiscuous "cruising" sex be any or all of these things? The conceptual
Page 43
The controversy between cultural and sex radical feminists outlined here took shape in the aftermath of the sexual revolution of the 1960s and early 1970s. While it is too generalized a description of the debate to capture some of the more subtle distinctions among various radical factions, it nevertheless captures some of the deeper rifts that continue to divide feminist approaches to women's sexuality as we enter the twenty-first century: does identifying male heterosexual sex as essentially dehumanizing to women liberate women to demand our own sexual needs, or does it reinforce women's identity as the sexual victims of men? Just how important is the oppression of women to women's sexuality, and how important is the oppression of sexuality to women's sexuality? Can women define sexuality in our own terms when what we have learned about our sexuality is itself a function of its social location under patriarchy? 36 Suppose we could show that promiscuous "cruising" sex could be , although it need not be, the kind of intimate, caring, and emotionally satisfying sex that a cultural feminist values. If we can loosen sexual exclusivity's stranglehold on care and respect in sex, then the promiscuity option that sex radical feminists want can satisfy the cultural feminist's requirement that good sex for women be sex that treats women as the subjects, not the objects, of our sexual experience. We would then have satisfied the desire of both groups that women's sex be defined in women's terms. In so doing, we can lay the foundation for a sexual ethic from the "view from somewhere different," an ethic that would encourage a sex radical's pursuit of sexual exploration without mirroring the heterosexual subordination of women by men that cultural feminism's demand for sexual intimacy is meant to preclude. Such an ethic could thus unify, not divide, the feminist vision of women as the agents and self-defining subjects of our sexual lives.
When cultural feminists say they value sexual intimacy, they seem to have at least three values in mind: (1) the private nature of the sex; (2) the personal nature of the sex; and (3) the comfort through trust in one's sexual partner. Can promiscuous "cruising" sex be any or all of these things? The conceptual
Similar Books
