But, you know, lesbians?

And phobia? Are you serious?

Listen I’m writing a pseudo book that I am going to post on this blog called “Straight Feminist Mis-characterizations.” I anticipate it will have endless contributions and I cannot wait to find out who, in whatever respect, I offend by laying out the mis-characterizations of Straight feminists.

Are you calling *me* a MIScharacterizer pisaquari??? Have you forgotten I’m a PERSON!?”

Homophobia— it didn’t even make the phobia list and I can’t imagine why not. As much as it is thrown around you’d expect the Medical Association to have a book out on it by now–Janice Raymond on the cover or something, with doodled devil horns and a strap on.

“Homophobia,” just to give you a taste of the pseudo book’s brilliance, will cover straight women and all their “homophobia” for about 9 chapters. There will be account after account of straight women recoiling at the sight and presence of homopersons, separatists throwing bombs at “lesbian” surgeons.

(Forgive me! You will need boots to walk through this snark)

… (edited for LENGTH–we get it Daria, you mad-libbed the whole post. I congratulate you on your attention to detail as it must have taken a very loooooong time to complete such a feat. I also envy your free time.)

“ut there is already a term for that…it’s called bisexual. There are two sexes, so if you fall in love with someone regardless of sex, then you’re bisexual.”

Well, applying this to my post, I’m still saying bisexual can have elements of fetishizing–it would simply come in the form of two sexes instead of one.

“And I think others here have also said as much. Normal, everyday lesbians and bisexual women do not sit around wanking to pictures of split beaver. If anyone does that, it’d most likely be men.”

Quite likely, yes. But I also think, as mentioned, this comment would not be as true for younger generations.
Plus, the female body as a fetish can mean waaay more than genitalia–legs, abs, breasts, butt.

So again, “Women are straight because they like MEN, not b/c they like looking at dicks. Women are lesbians b/c they like women, not b/c they like the sight of vulvas.”–has not been the bulk of my impression via experience.

“I just find it bizarre that you insist people are gay or straight based on liking the looks of someone’s genitalia. That’s kinda strange. I usually feel like I am attracted to people DESPITE their genitals.”
Well, again, I’ve never said sexuality HAS TO or ONLY rests on this fetishization. Just that I’ve understood it to be part of the orienting process.

Isn’t that putting words in her mouth? What I took from the sentence you originally cited –

Though I understand the reasoning behind using genitalia as a marker for certain kinds of socialization–hence not dating males because the chances they are sexist assholes is simply too HIGH

is that she had straight women who have sworn off men more in mind. As in a woman who uses penises as a ‘marker’ for people to avoid romantically, following a lot of nasty lessons.

I assume this is what she means because if the ONLY reason you are not dating men is because they’re assholes, then you are not a lesbian, correct? I suppose you may decide to be a political lesbian, or you may choose just not to date others.

The sentence with ‘creepy, creepy’ in it is:

Not because bodies are ew but because that creepy creepy preoccupation with others’ parts is

in which she also does not single out lesbians.

I think it’s time to acknowledge that prejudices can show even when that isn’t the conscious intention.

In my experience, feminists are more likely to do this than anyone else, not that they always get it right the first try.

You know what. That’s a brilliant insight, and I think you’re spot on with that. I came of age in a really good time…after everyone figured out that women had clitorises and deserved sexual pleasure, but before ubiquitous internet porn. So, yeah, my sexual experiences were really good. I did have a couple encounters that were coercive or otherwise unpleasant, but they weren’t the norm.

Oh, and since my avatar doesn’t show in your comments, I wanted to make to make you knew that I’m BBB. I just changed my handle recently to match my blog addy.

Why is it you think a libido would be dependent on the existence of an orientation? What if someone just likes who they like? Falls in love with people because they find they do great things, treat others well and act ethically? And at no point are triggered by the desire to be with them based on predetermined categories–do you not feel this is possible?

Of course, I think it’s possible. But there is already a term for that…it’s called bisexual. There are two sexes, so if you fall in love with someone regardless of sex, then you’re bisexual.

And if you do feel it’s possible, isn’t it then still possible to enjoy the physical sensations of sex while having neutral feeling about the sight of their genitals?

Yes, of course. I think I said earlier that I find genitals kinda funny looking. I don’t get aroused at the sight of disembodied genitals. And I think others here have also said as much. Normal, everyday lesbians and bisexual women do not sit around wanking to pictures of split beaver. If anyone does that, it’d most likely be men.

I just find it bizarre that you insist people are gay or straight based on liking the looks of someone’s genitalia. That’s kinda strange. I usually feel like I am attracted to people DESPITE their genitals.

Women are straight because they like MEN, not b/c they like looking at dicks. Women are lesbians b/c they like women, not b/c they like the sight of vulvas.

Polly:

“No you’re not. You’re saying the whole reason that anyone has a sexual orientation is that they fixate on their partner’s genitals.”

Please read the original post: “One of the BIG reasons I no longer believe in, or support the idea of, sexual orientation”
Please read the subsequent comments I’ve made after to many commenters, including you:
1. “My point is, making a decision partly based on an attraction to inborn parts of a person is wrong–”
2. “I have said, several times through this discussion, that the attraction to parts is only *one portion* of the orientation. It does not mean that the reasons people fall for each other are all bad. It simply means that this *one* dynamic is a problem.”
3. “I said people make part of their decision to love females (if it can be called that) based on a visual relationship to their body parts.”

Not ONCE have I said what the *whole* reasoning is behind sexual orientation.
If I have said otherwise anywhere in this thread, quote me.

Polly:

“NO ONE I know has a sexual orientation just because they like LOOKING at their partner’s genitals. No one I know has sex that consists just of staring at the partners sexual organs.”

See comments above. And below.

Polly:

“But if you are NOW saying Pisaquari, that most people’s sexual orientation is just because they like the appearance of their partner’s genitals, and LOOKING at their partner’s genitals. (Which you didn’t say at all originally, but never mind). That is utter crap and bullshit. Full Stop.”

Umm, Polly–I actually know A LOT of people who happily talk about how, when they met their significant other, what first brought them to the other person was their nice chest, cute butt, nice legs, etc… (men and women here polly). Is that the sum total of their sexual orientation? No, of course not. But it doesn’t have to be to still be a problem.

Polly:

“Can I ask which women have fixated on YOUR body parts specifically and how you know that they did this – I mean YOUR BODY PARTS, not just women who are sexually attracted to women – because it’s a bit arrogant to assume a woman who is sexually attracted to women in general is automatically to you.

And what did this woman/women do? Did they harass you? Did they take pictures of your body part parts without your knowledge? Did they yell at you in the street?”

Yes, well, I was actually thinking of specific instances where a woman has spoken of my body in a way I find unsavory. The last time I can think of was a year or so ago when a woman (who liked women) told me “Nice tits” whilst staring right at my chest. She didn’t harass or stalk me (yaaay!), no. Shall I submit to you transcripts of anytime I’ve felt a woman spoke wrongly of my body to make sure I get your approval?

Polly:

“That women shouldn’t be allowed to be sexually attracted to other women because you don’t like it and find the idea disgusting? “

Once again, I’m saying fetishizing body parts is wrong Polly. Do you or do you not agree with this statement?

Margaret:

“Ah, but, see, what you actually said was that orientation *itself* (and you didn’t limit it to males) was problematic, not the fact that some lesbian women have adopted the social standards of males.”

You’re right, I didn’t. But I also didn’t mention that females have adopted social standards of males to apply to *other males*. I didn’t spell out a lot of things because I didn’t find it necessary–I was pointing out one *behavior* that I thought was wrong and a context in which I generally see it: orientation. Now, you find orientation to be a male concept. I’m not in total disagreement with you there. But it makes sense to me, if you feel what I’m talking about (wrt lesbians) is a male-created behavior, that I would name it under a male-created concept. It doesn’t mean I equate all of lesbianism with male sexuality. I’m saying that when they display *this* behavior it happens in *this* context.

Veganprimate:

“It’s OK not to like sex. It’s OK to not have a libido. But I’m objecting to people who don’t have a libido criticizing people who do. No, you didn’t say that outright, but it was implied. How was it implied? By saying that people who have an orienation are fetishists.”

Now, I know in your follow up comment you apologized for participating in what you called a “pile-on.” I appreciate your concern, thank you. (I promise, however, I do not feel overwhelmed by the disagreement–though I can’t say I’m thrilled with the way all the convos have went)
So, maybe you don’t intend to carry forth any conversation on this thread and if so I understand. But what I quoted above really confuses me so I wanted to see if I could parse it out with you. If nothing else, for understanding.
Why is it you think a libido would be dependent on the existence of an orientation? What if someone just likes who they like? Falls in love with people because they find they do great things, treat others well and act ethically? And at no point are triggered by the desire to be with them based on predetermined categories–do you not feel this is possible? And if you do feel it’s possible, isn’t it then still possible to enjoy the physical sensations of sex while having neutral feeling about the sight of their genitals? I mean that in the was Twisty said it: “a vulva is precisely as “beautiful” as an elbow or a nostril?”

General Comment
I’ve been thinking about something that may be very much influencing my opinion: I would venture I am younger than all those commenting here. My first exposure to pornography was in elementary school–hardcore, sadistic pornography. I didn’t have too many friends with much different a story. Porn is laden with hours of stills and frame-shots of *just genitalia*. Now, I know bodies have been fetishized for a while in different ways but I do think the porn-saturation in the last 10 years has been intense beyond belief. More so than older generations. Girls in high school now refer to their female friends’ genitalia as “pussy.” Boob jobs are commonplace. Labiaplasty is on its way to commonplace. I have felt my parts fetishized for a very long time by a lot of people (boyfriends, friends, strangers) and had virtually NO ONE call out the behavior. So I’m thinking, part of my *intense* insistence on the problems of this behavior and it’s ill-effects might very well be my age and the fact I have been surrounded by it for most of my life.

I’m sorry.

I was pointing out that Pisaquairi’s comment referred specifically to lesbians and that was the only sexual orientation she referred to. Because the only other group of people it could have referred to was gay men and it would have been a bit daft if it did. What is clearly implied by Pisaquari’s comment is that if you don’t date men because you don’t like male genitals/only like female genitals that is *creepy, creepy*

It was nothing to do with not dating men making you a lesbian.

Unless you are saying *not dating men* is an ORIENTATION ValerieM. The post is about orientation remember?

Now I’m sorry but there are no accidents. Since several commenters who are not in any way connected, or part of a deliberate swarm, have said the same thing here, I think it’s time to acknowledge that prejudices can show even when that isn’t the conscious intention.