Tag Archives: Virginity

Yes Means Yes: When is a Virgin a Virgin?


This post contains discussion of sex which may not be suitable for some readers

Recently I have been reading ‘Yes Means Yes‘, a collection of essays which talk about female sexuality and consent and how stereotypical visions of female sexuality contribute to a rape culture. It’s a powerful book. I had planned to get to the end and then talk about it overall as I would do with a book normally, but recently some of the articles have really been getting in my head and I feel like it might be better to write down some thoughts specifically on those articles. I probably won’t do this for every article but it seems like a better way to look at it, and I will do a sort of summery post when I’m completely done.

This is my sixth of these review/thought posts for Yes Means Yes, (and probably the last bar an overall roundup) you can read the rest here:

Touch and Consent / Killing Misogyny / The First Time / Sex Education / Nice Guys Finish Last

The Process-Orientated Virgin

-Hanne Blank

When Blank met her first process-orientated virgin she was rather taken-aback. This woman had being having sex for over a year before she considered her virginity lost, because that was the first time she had an orgasm.

I’ve heard before of people claiming multiple types of virginity, hetrosexual virginty, gay/lesbian virginity, anal virginity, but never about people claiming that virginity could carry on after some sort of sexual intercourse had occurred (although many may say it has to be penis in vagina sex for virginity to be lost).

But the more I think about it the more I like the idea. It’s sort of freeing. It says sex should be enjoyed, so until I enjoy sex, it’s not really sex. And hey, how many people actually really enjoy their first time? They don’t really know what they’re doing. Their nervous. There can be blood and generally unsexy things going on. For many it can be too quick, or painful (not all but a not painful time tends to be seen as a good first time, as discussed previously in the book).

I like the idea that you can think that your first time is when you experienced good sex. When you feel like you have lost all your virgin ideas and naivety, and that’s just for those who choose when to have sex. Think of how liberating it could be for rape survivors to really loose their virginity when they choose.

Plus it gets rid of that whole thing of what loss of virginity is, because it’s decided by the virgin.

What do you think? Can virginity be redefined like this? Should it just be first time sex? Of hetrosexual type or of prefered type?

Advertisements

2 Comments

Filed under essays, Feminism, non-fiction review

Yes Means Yes: The First Time


Warning: This post contains discussion of sexual subjects

Recently I have been reading ‘Yes Means Yes‘, a collection of essays which talk about female sexuality and consent and how stereotypical visions of female sexuality contribute to a rape culture. It’s a powerful book. I had planned to get to the end and then talk about it overall as I would do with a book normally, but recently some of the articles have really been getting in my head and I feel like it might be better to write down some thoughts specifically on those articles. I probably won’t do this for every article but it seems like a better way to look at it, and I will do a sort of summery post when I’m completely done.

This is my third of these review/though posts for Yes Means Yes, you can read the first here and the second here

An Immodest Proposal

-Heather Corinna

In ‘An Immodest Proposal’ Corinna tells the story of a stereotypical loss of virginity. Two teenagers, a boy and a girl. They have been dating for some time and are becoming gradually more sexually involved. The boy has made it be known that he would like to have sex, but has not been pushy. The girl decides that she is ready and when an appropriate time comes they lose their virginities together. There is some bleeding for her but it is not painful, he orgasms, she doesn’t.

It is what would often be described as a ‘good’ first time for her. She didn’t feel forced or unprepared, he was nice to her and waited for her to be ready.

Initially you think what is the issue here? Then Corinna reveals that this story- a perfectly believable- and for many associatable- story is about the boy. He wants sex, she is merely ready. For her the experience is not unpleasant, but she gets no real pleasure from it. So is it really fair to call it a good first time? Should she not hope for more? The whole way the language is used to describe a first time makes it seem very passive. Maybe she does want sex, maybe she does want it to feel good, but she has been always told that for a girl’s first time to be good she only has to be willing. When you really think about it that isn’t fair. A boy is expected to want sex, she is expected to wait for love, or at least someone special.

On the other hand a first time should maybe not be expected to be actually good. The participants are inexperienced, they might not even fully know what they themselves like, let alone what their partner wants. They know the mechanics, but maybe not specifics. As they do more and see more what they like, and get to find what makes the other person feel good, as they become more confident, thing should (hopefully) get better. The girl may feel she can get more involved, and be a participant, rather than just someone who had something happening to them.

In an ideal world everytime should be good, but it’s a bit far to actually expect every time to be good. I think women should be able to feel that they can seek pleasure (even the first time), and that they can initiate sex, but for them to expect it, maybe not.

What do you think of this? Are women at a disadvantage when it comes to sexual pleasure from the onset?

 

 

5 Comments

Filed under essays, Feminism, non-fiction review