To be a woman and a sexual being
We are raised to be chaste, innocent, sexually obtuse fragile creatures while our male counter parts are allowed free reign to discover their sexual appetite, the same appetite that they will want to sate with the sexually obtuse girls. Now this raises an obvious dilemma and a problem so deep in how girls and boys are raised and sexualised by their parents that you would be considered lucky to understand it; girls are now in a position to make their own parents proud by remaining pure and not engaging in themselves or peers sexually while being socially rejected by the boys who have been taught to hunt them to show that they are “normal”, healthy and masculine. Wewant to be equal which is fine and dandy but do we even realise the discrepancy in how we are taught to behave sexually that make girls and boys incompatible?
Girls are essentially taught to have no sense of sexuality while boys are taught to be southern head lead mongrels that will benefit from these girls lack of knowledge, basically making them products of male sexual consumption by puberty. It’s not a pretty picture but there it is and yet people seem to reject the idea of women seeking some form of autonomy and emancipation from this patriarchal catch 22 thrust upon them by their parents and later emphasized by society.
In the English language and I use it as an example because it’s become the language of common ground, there is no one word or phrase available to describe a woman’s healthy sexual functioning and behaviour, psychologically and physically in society however many variations are available to slander a woman for any form of sexual behaviour ranging from being a prude to being [add profanity of your choosing here defaming women for having a sexual appetite that keeps up with her partner/s]. Men on the other hand are regarded as masculine, healthy and downright normal for seeking any and all forms of sexual relief whether it is self-inflicted or assisted by a companion. I’m not saying that men and women should be expected to be the same sexually, I merely ask that our behaviour be seen as compatible and whatever they may be we are not lesser beings for them on account of gender rather than the act itself. Think about how a man can talk about cheating and it will be looked at as a “That’s what men do” and if a woman cheats “These hoes ain’t loyal”, when it could easily be a moral issue in which adultery is wrong because cheating is wrong not more or less acceptable because of the gender of the adulterer.
Many ideals have been added onto the picture of an ideal partner in a women whereby in addition to being a home maker, nurturing, caring, child bearing capable and able to contribute an income a woman is now expected to have had a particular sexual history and lack of reputation. I cannot discard any one combination of preferences, good heavens I have my own strange preferences for a partner, but what crawls up my skin in all the wrong ways is when one person uses their one potentially small minded preference to regard a woman unworthy of being a life partner on account of being sexually alive in a manner that she deems healthy and that he/she deems unacceptable. Taking into account that human beings have fetishes ranging from that of toes to under arms, as a man how do you muster up the courage to call someone’s daughter a whore just because they shamelessly enjoy sexual acts that are considered normal in several societies? Furthermore as a human being how do you find it sensible to say sex is not important or that big of a deal and yet in the same day use sexual behaviour to summarise a person’s entire character? I’m quite keen for answers to these questions mostly because I want to know what path of logic leads you here.
I’m no expert (yet) on human sexual behaviour; however, I have read and seen enough to hereby declare that humans have a strange way of relating to each other sexually when they are not having sex with each other or interacting in any sexual manner.