When did I know he was ‘the one’?

I’ve just been reading a blog in which men posted their stories of when they realised their girlfriend was ‘the one’.  I am assuming such stories are interchangeable with regard to sexuality, but as the blog was heteronormative in posting, and as my relationship is heterosexual, we’ll stick with those terms.

It got me wondering – what would my partner write about when he knew I was the one?  We do talk about it sometimes, as he is an incurable romantic with a brilliant memory for such things (me, not so much…), and being the egoist I always want to hear!  But when did I know he was the one?

The truth is, I don’t think there is any one moment when I realised he was the one, the person to whom I would plight my troth, with whom I would tie the knot and with whom my life would become forever entwined.  I think, honestly, that those around me probably understood the truth of my relationship before I did.

Some background – I met my partner when I had just turned 32.  I had never before in all my life been involved in a relationship that lasted more than four months.  I was a running joke with lots of my friends, and I joined in that joke because I, by that point, was completely happy with the idea that I would not have a long-term relationship.  I didn’t need one; I knew what I wanted and didn’t want and was not prepared to compromise.  Fun would still be had.  I firmly believed, and still do believe, that a long-term relationship is not essential to happiness or contentment, but that it can enhance both if it is the right one.

He, on the other hand, was a bit of a serial monogamist.  Lots of long-term relationships; we’d even drunk at the same pub 10 years previously (Dew Drop Inn for those in the know) and having seen photos of him was GORGEOUS and exactly the person I would have flirted incredibly outrageously with, but we never met.  Neither of us was ready.  Both of us needed to go through our ‘issues’ before we would be able to be ourselves and therefore be fully committed to a relationship.  I had many issues…  Not least of which was a total lack of belief in myself as a partner early on (which was resolved quite early too, about 6 years before we met) but I then had many physical issues (I may blog about some of them) which also needed to be resolved and affected my body image severely.  Strangely, I never had issues with regard to sex; I always thought once you’d both reached that point it didn’t matter, we all have body image issues and the fact we had reached that point meant the ‘turned on’ outweighed the ‘body paranoia’!  I apologise to my parents if they are reading this, by now you know more than you ever wanted to!

It is not only important for someone to be ‘the one’ but also that you meet them when you are ready in yourself for that ‘one’ relationship.  If you are the type of personality who would suit a ‘the one’ relationship.  For some people, a lifelong commitment is not for them.  I always knew that if I ended up in a ‘the one’ relationship it would be monogamous, but never thought I needed a ‘the one’.  That is also important to me – needing a person is not healthy, wanting them but not needing them is.  I never want to be without him, but I know if I was I could cope with life (I wouldn’t want to, but I could).

I was very confused early on in the relationship.  I was used to realising quickly in relationships that it was fun, but that it would end due to differences which were currently minor but which would grow to problems (pretty much the ending was always my decision; looking back I made those decisions occasionally for the wrong reasons and under assumption rather than knowledge, and may have hurt people – I projected onto them and I pre-emptively struck the relationship off my list).  I didn’t want this one to end.  It just kept going, and it grew, almost organically and almost in spite of myself.  I just didn’t want him to go.  He didn’t complete me (I was already complete by this time, thank you very much), but he made my life better.  I remember discussions with friends where I literally didn’t know what I was doing with him, because I had never gone past the four month barrier and this was all new ground.

I decided to see how it went, and not to put any pressure on it.  Let it develop, organically, don’t set up problems or try to see the future.  The future will happen anyway, I might as well concentrate on the present!

I don’t remember who said ‘I Love You’ first (he probably does).  I do know we say it to each other every morning before whichever one of us is going to work leaves, and end every text with it, and say it many times to the point of probably making everyone around us physically sick.  We say it because it is true, and because we want the last words to be ones of love.  We have both experienced early deaths of people close to us.

I met his family early on.  Two weeks after our first date, to be exact.  He has since told me that his father said to him as I left that it was clear I was ‘the one’.  He did not tell me that for a number of years, because frankly that would have made me run a mile!  His father passed away a year after we met, about four days after both sets of parents met for the first time and after our first performance of our first play with a new theatre group just formed – I was Titania, he was Oberon.  It means so much to me that his father said that.  He knew I was the one, as did my partner.  After two weeks, I would not have known that. By the time of the play, I had a pretty good idea he might be.

I remember walking up the road towards his flat after we had been together about five months, idly chatting about the future, and the words “when we are married…” just slipped out.  Me, a person who had always said I probably would never get married.  Not because I didn’t want to, or thought that there was anything wrong with the institution (apart from the fact it is not available to those in same-sex relationship; that is and always shall be a shameful discrimination which should be stopped), but merely because it did not seem necessary to me and I had never met anyone I thought I would be able to make that sort of lifelong commitment too.  I was very embarrassed, and turned into Hugh Grant stuttering like a fool in an attempt to cover it up.

I think that, given the above story, it could probably be said that I proposed to him.  However, he did propose to me.  He took me to a jewellery shop and I picked out a ring (he has an engagement ring too, but chose not to have one that can be worn on his finger; shocking!).  I can’t remember if I took the ring off, or if he had it in a box already (my memory is that of a sieve), but I ended up organising a dinner out for some friends which turned into a surprise engagement dinner.  Our friends were so excited they kept hinting at my partner to propose, making arch comments which I did not pick up on at all (honestly, it’s a miracle I can breathe and walk at the same time).

He told me about four years later that he had been to the shop first and picked that ring, and asked the shop assistant to place it where it was visible to me.  I looked around the whole shop, and picked that exact ring.  He just knew.  He always knows.  I find that comforting.  If he was not the one, I think that might be creepy!

He has never, ever been afraid to be public about his love for me, nor I him, but we are not cloying (I hope).  We are still individuals, but together we are better.  We support one another, give strength and love, but do not smother or demolish dreams because they are ‘impractical’.  We discuss, talk things through, and have the same guiding principles.  Our future plans – no children, places we want to travel, him being the main homemaker, me being the main breadwinner (although frankly I feel those roles are so complimentary it almost seems silly to separate them) etc., coincide.  He is as much of, if not more so, a feminist as I am.  He gets me when I say I find the use of the ‘Mrs/Miss’ terms fundamentally discriminatory and perpetuates inequality, whilst being against prohibition of the use of those terms (the woman’s right to choose does not end with reproductive decisions).  Our principles match, our ‘big life decisions’ match.  If they hadn’t matched, then he would not have been ‘the one’, it’s as simple as that.

Relationships, if they are right, in my opinion shouldn’t seem like hard work.  Yes, you may have to discuss, disagreements will happen, but if it seems like hard work to be with them then perhaps being with them is not the right decision.  We argue (generally about semantics; yes we are that pedantic) but resolving issues is never hard work, it just is what happens.  I know he is the one, and therefore any work is not work, it’s just a part of the relationship which happens, and I never lose sight of the fact he loves me completely (hard to lose sight of something which is constantly being said in front of everyone you know; copious ‘vom’ comments on FB statuses will attest to that).

When did I know he was the one?  There is no one point in time I can look to and say “yes, that was it, then”.  It crept up on me.  My subconscious knew before I did.  What I do know is that, as a friend of mine recently put, “we make each other better” (said friend was intoxicated, bless him).  All I do know is that if I think of my life without him in it, my mind shuts down to fend off the panic attack.  He is the one.  I know it, from the innermost reaches of my emotions to the outermost areas of my life.  It doesn’t matter when I knew it.  I just did and do and always will.

He doesn’t know I wrote this.  I wonder what his reaction will be?

The Stalker of the Child

Yes, I am continuing my fine tradition of being all interfere-y and refusing to keep my sticky beak out of it.  No, I am not the person to whom I refer in the title of this blog, you cheeky gets!

So, I’m stood at the bus stop, after a long day at work being all responsible and legalish, waiting for my carriage to take me to hearth, home and lovely snuggly husband.  I become aware of raised voices behind me.  I wait, keeping my body turned away (it was a walking stick day) until I hear the words “You come near my daughter again and I’ll…”.  Child.  That’s like a red rag to me.  I look round, expecting to see a couple of kids harassing another kid, whose mother has stepped in.

Oh, how wrong I was.  This tiny, tiny 13 year old girl is in near hysterics, which develop into full-on hysteria as time goes by.  Her mother is shielding her and moving away from a very large adult woman aged at least over 25, who keeps moving towards her.  Every time the woman and her daughter move, this stalker (as she shall now be known) moves towards her.  This scenario keeps looking more and more threatening, and frankly I am not the kind of person who can stand by and let such situations develop, walking stick and challenged stature notwithstanding.

The stalker is stood about 3 inches away from the mother, who has her arm around her hysterical daughter and is clearly very, very angry but making no physical moves apart from the attempt to get away (thwarted at every turn by the stalker, who keeps looking at the daughter).  The mother and daughter are now trapped between the bus stand, a telephone junction and people behind them.  So I sidle over, saying nothing and making no eye contact, and slip my walking stick in between the mother and the stalker.  Slowly I edge forward, until I am fully in between them, still saying nothing but making my presence VERY obvious.  After a couple of minutes, I ask the mother if she is okay.  She is not, and again tries to walk away from the stalker, clutching her daughter VERY tightly.  They end up a good 4 metres away, to no avail as the stalker carries on the slanging match and follows.  No matter where the mother and daughter move, she is there, too close and very threatening.

The mother has had enough, and by this time I have overheard that this woman regularly follows her daughter home from school, getting on her daughter’s bus and has even at one point pulled the little girl’s hair.  The mother calls the police, and I go over to say I have heard and seen everything, and am perfectly willing to be a witness.

The mother starts to tell me the full history, confirming what I had overheard.  It has also become painfully apparent that the stalker has mental health problems.  That is no excuse, but may provide an explanation.

The mother has reported a previous incident to the police, and been told that they can’t do anything because the stalker has mental health problems.  That is a disservice to the stalker; she clearly needs help.  This becomes more apparent as I am told the stalker has previously stalked another girl from the time the other girl was in Year 5.  She has also, allegedly (because this is hearsay and I have no proof), got a conviction for previously attacking another child.  It is painfully obvious this woman needs help.

I am going nowhere until I have either seen the police or seen the mother and daughter safely on to the bus to their home without being followed; I really don’t care how long it might take, I am not putting up with this.  The police don’t come, and the stalker stands about three metres away, constantly looking around but by this time silent.  The daughter is just about starting to calm down, so I do my usual “attempt to make them laugh” whilst trying to cover up my utter shock at the attitude of the police and the inadequacy of mental health services.  I work in Lewisham Centre, between the daughter’s school and the bus stop where the daughter has to get the bus.  I give her my name, work address, details of where the office is EXACTLY, my work land line and my mobile number, and tell her if she is being followed or if she feels threatened at all in any way, to come to the office and I will call her mother while she is in safety.  I tell the mother exactly what I have done and suggest they call me on Monday to confirm the information is bona fide.  The mother works, she can only collect her daughter on Mondays and Fridays.  It is not always practical for people to arrange someone to pick up a child from school.  I wanted to ensure she could feel safe, and that her mother was happy with the arrangement.  I did wonder if that was maybe going too far, but you know what? I don’t think it was.  If ANY child I know and love is at any time feeling threatened, I hope they might have a contact of safety.  I hope no-one I know is ever in need of such a bolthole, but I am glad I had the opportunity of providing one.  If it is never used, it is there.

There are people all around us, and some school-friends of the girl come over (they were not there before).  It is confirmed they have seen the stalker before.  Neither the daughter or the mother have any idea who the stalker is.  She picked the daughter out completely at random.

We are surrounded by people; a young tall skinny alternative-looking man (who may have been responsible for the very strong smell of a certain substance that wafted by occasionally, which mother and I had joked out of earshot of daughter about) made it clear he, too, was keeping an eye out.  I became aware of how many people there were around us, no-one being as interfere-y as me of course, who were keeping a subtle eye out.  Community at its best.

At no point did anyone make any threat towards the stalker.  Then a woman who obviously knew the stalker came up to talk to her, and jokingly asked if she was all right and if any of the kids has been harassing her again.  As she said this to the stalker, she looked towards the daughter probably not realising what the impact of what she was saying was having.  The mother naturally stood up for her daughter (never at any time making any move away from cradling her daughter as close to her as she could); there is a history of harassment and her daughter has never harassed anyone.  The woman accepts this.  However, she states, loudly and many times, that the stalker has been harassed by schoolchildren before, and therefore it is perfectly acceptable, understandable, and the fault of the daughter for being a schoolchild that she is being stalked, and has been physically assaulted before.  Further, because the woman has mental health issues, she cannot be held responsible and it is unfair if any steps be taken to try and stop the woman doing this.  The daughter should just put up with it.

I cannot believe my ears.  I think my jaw bounced off the floor at least twice.  This is an adult woman stating that because a few, a minority, of children have behaved in a disgusting manner towards someone with mental health issues then ALL children will just have to put up with criminal, threatening behaviour.  However, I don’t need to say anything and can concentrate on the mother and daughter because the young man immediately steps in and takes quite a lot of verbal abuse, deflecting the attention.  Eventually this idiot moves on.

We are still waiting for the police.

The stalker moves away to sit at a bus stop, and two other school-girls who have never met the daughter before stay near us, checking occasionally without drawing attention to themselves where the stalker is.  Yes, school-children, you know, those ones that deserve to be harassed because a couple of kids behave badly.  Well, there are adults in prison who have behaved badly, and no-one thinks ALL adults should just put up with assault, stalking, being threatened and harassment just because some adults have been harassed.  I do not subscribe to that point of view.

The stalker is so obviously in desperate need of help; there is a clear pattern of behaviour and it is not helping her at all to excuse, accept and ignore this behaviour.  She needs help.  She is not getting it.  I assume she must actually do someone a serious injury before she gets any help.

Finally, after 50 minutes, the stalker gets onto a bus and leaves.  The daughter, who has calmed down considerably, visibly relaxes.  I suggest that the mother and daughter get on the next bus to their home and phone the police from there.  They have all my contact information, I assure them I will be a witness, and the mother is happy that her daughter seek refuge in my solicitors office if she needs it.  I see them off, adamant I am NOT LEAVING until I see them both safely onto their bus.  I did not see the stalker get on the bus, and I am not taking any chances.  I have no idea what I would do if actually confronted, but I believe that the mere presence of witnesses can do a lot to deter action.  There were a lot of people around, but sometimes a word, a look, an assurance that yes you have noticed and no you are not going to stand by and let it happen, is enough.  They leave, smiling and thanking me.  I don’t think I need thanking.  I am sure if I hadn’t stepped in, someone else would have.  There were others around, keeping an eye out.  I think I just got there first.

The police never turned up.  Apparently, and this is what they told the mother, there was a serious car accident in Lewisham, and some other incidents, so the largest police station in Europe which was located 200 yards walk away from where we were stood could not provide even a special constable to come and ensure that a child who was being harassed and stalked by a known stalker was okay.

Hmmmm….

Why I Believe Sex Work Should be Legalised

This is one of the beliefs of Sex Positive Feminism, which my last blog listed as point 3, and which I said I would come back to as (a) the previous post was over 2000 words long ; and (b) this point alone is probably going to be near that length too.

Legalising sex work is controversial.  There is so much wrong with the current mainstream sex industry; as with all other areas of society (and remember, please, I can only write about what I know so this is from my perspective as detailed in the “Who I Am” section of this blog) it exists within the inherent gender/heritage/race/ability/sexuality etc. discriminations that ALL systems and institutions are influenced by.  That is crucial; all institutions and systems are subject to and either wittingly or unwittingly perpetuate the discriminations even if they specifically attempt to address the discriminations.  Societal change is slow, there is no either/or, just gradual evolving.  Sex work is merely one such institution, and because of the overt gender and sexuality prejudices they have been the most obviously utilised and widely accessible examples of perpetuation of the discriminations.  However, that does not mean they are defined by those discriminations, any more than gender-stereotyping occupations such as nursing, plumbing, secretary, midwife, fireman, milkman, binman, postman (see the connection developing here?) are defined by the stereotype.

But what exactly is sex work?  Historically, it has been defined as prostitution and pornography.  However, one could extend this definition to include anything in which sex features as part of a person’s labour by which they derive their income; ‘sex sells’ is a frequent mantra of advertising, so is it sex work to take part in advertising campaigns which either explicitly or implicitly use sex as a tool of selling?  Is it sex work to be part of creating a scene in a film which has sexual content in it?  Celebrity culture derives much of its material from sex and lust – is that sex work?  Magazines on shelves aimed at men which are not defined as being in the pornographic industry, such as FHM or Loaded, feature pictures on their covers which are frequently indistinguishable from the covers of porn magazines just one or two shelves up.  Are the creators, producers and participants partaking in sex work?  Although acts of sex such as kissing and touching may be involved in such labour, it seems that the definition of sex work is when actual acts of physical or verbal sexual intercourse (not necessarily penetrative) occur; when the sexual activity is ‘real’ as opposed to ‘acting’ on the part of at least one participant (for example, with phone sex lines one of the participants may well be doing no more than reading a script).  Even that line has been blurred in modern production, and is becoming more so.  There are also other types of labour in the sex industry which are not illegal nor involve sexual activity, such as shop workers in establishments selling sex-related products.

As I am talking about legalising sex work though, it should be assumed I am discussing pornography and prostitution.  Even then, the laws with regard to pornography are complicated.  In the UK much pornography is legal which leads me to conclude it’s already okay to engage in sex for money as long as it is filmed or photographed for distribution.  That’s bizarre to me…

Therefore, it seems, this blog is about legalising prostitution, that being the only form of sex work which is actually illegal (and may also have the largest introduction to a blog in the history of blogging).

For background, here is a brief summary of my understanding of sex positive feminist beliefs with regard to sexual behaviours, from my previous blog:

1. Sex Positivism is about informed consenting sexual activity.
2. Sex Positivism is not about moral judgements.
3. Sex Positivism is about fostering healthy attitudes towards one’s body and one’s sexuality.
4. Sex Positivism is about autonomy over one’s own body.
5. Sex Positivism is about accepting that people, all people, of all shapes, sizes, sexualities etc. are sexual beings and have a right to express their sexuality without moral judgement or impingement.

‘Prostitute’ is the only job title which is considered an insult (except maybe ‘banker’), and it is gendered.  Male prostitutes exist, but the gender has to be stated in order for it to be understood the worker is male, either that or such terms as ‘rent boy’, ‘escort or ‘gigolo’ are employed.  For male prostitutes, the assumption is that it is a gay activity, and homophobia comes in to play, or their job is seen as servicing older woman and possibly is a good thing, because of course men are supposed to be highly sexed and are ‘allowed’ to have sex with more than one partner without being married or in an emotionally attached relationship.  Women do employ prostitutes, increasingly so as it becomes more acceptable for women to have sex lives, but still there is the slut/stud dichotomy that is never so obvious in relation to sex workers.  I see ‘prostitute’ as a job title akin to my own (Litigation Assistant according to my firm’s website), and that is how the term is being used in this blog.

In order for legalisation of prostitution to work, social attitudes towards gender/sexuality and sex must change.  As was shown when Amsterdam legalised the sex industry, social attitudes were not addressed and this meant any complaints of abuse made by the prostitutes were subject to the same discriminations as before.  If the law is changed, it must be enacted; many prostitutes in Amsterdam found their complaints were discounted, treated as ‘part of the job’ or it was considered they had ‘deserved it’.  These attitudes are prevalent with regard to sex workers.  Legalising would be a start in giving sex workers protection, but are part of the bigger change towards creating non-discriminatory attitudes towards sexuality.

If a person visits a prostitute, the reason for the visit is not the responsibility of a prostitute.  Society would not judge a plasterer, for example, who visits a property to fix damage caused by a domestic violence incident.  There are myriad reasons for employing a prostitute, none of them the responsibility of the prostitute.  Such reasons should not be an influence when making laws regarding sex work and/or prostitution.  They are more to be understood in the context of sex education, and the broader issues involved in relationship & life skills learning.

The reasons why one may become a prostitute are also myriad.  Here is where freely-given informed consent comes in.  The illegality of prostitution means it is not an option people can make when considering paid employment choices.  This means that many people who do choose the option do so from a position of desperation.  For those people, informed consent is subject to pressure and is not freely given.  Extreme debt, drug addiction, history of abuse; these all may restrict a person’s ability to give free informed consent.  However, it is possible that a person with such influences has given free informed consent; to assume not is to assume knowledge of someone one cannot have unless one is close to the prostitute.  Legalising prostitution would help people escape from the trap they may have fallen into as a result of such pressures; no criminal record would help in job applications and combined with a social policy of non-judgemental acceptance, the stigma attached to sex work would (slowly) recede.

The illegality of prostitution in part enables the abuse to continue.  Trafficked sex workers, underage sex workers – these are not sex workers and I do not agree with the reference to the same.  They are abuse victims, they are rape victims.  It is commercialised rape, and is not part of the sex work industry.  At the moment though, they are considered to be, and it is down to the fact it is a blanket illegality.  Legalising prostitution would not legalise these aspects of the industry; in fact it would free up vital resources for detecting and prosecuting these abuses.

Not forgetting our basic right to autonomy over our own bodies.  If a person chooses to become a prostitute, then it is their absolute right to do that with their body.  Any employment we may take up uses a physical part of ourselves in one way or another.  It is the moral rules built up around sex which have caused sex work to become an employment which is negatively morally judged.  There are those who have historically and do currently choose to work in the sex industry; freely and with informed consent.  It is every person’s right to make that choice, and to make that choice illegal removes a fundamental right to body autonomy.

If prostitution is to be legalised, it must be regulated and the voices of the prostitutes must be heard in designing these regulations.  The protection of both sex workers and those who employ them is paramount.  I feel it is of principal importance that the prostitute be the one with charge of their employment.  Undue pressure can be exerted by employers in the quest for profit and/or business (as I am sure we can all recognise from our experiences of legal employment, although I am currently in the blissful position of loving my paid employment and being able to respect those for whom I work; I am fully aware of how lucky I am!).  The prostitute must be in charge of deciding what services they will or will not offer.  It may be that contracts between the prostitute and employer of their services should be drawn up; the practicalities of such arrangements notwithstanding, it would provide the prostitute with further protection in the victim-blaming sexual abuse culture we currently endure and ensure the client has a clear understanding of what they have contracted to partake in.  Regular STD testing would be required and legalising sex work would make access to such services and certificating the same (as is already part of the porn industry) far easier.

There would no longer be a fear for the prostitute who wishes to utilise the safety of collectivism and group protection which at the moment leaves them open to charges of running brothels.  The illegality of prostitution forces many to put themselves into dangerous situations, which again because of victim-blaming sexual abuse culture means if they are attacked or abused they have little or no recourse.  The worker on the street or the woman ‘employed’ by a pimp is in potential danger, and can have free informed choice taken from them at least in part (I am not ignoring the impact sex stereotypes has on this) because of the illegality of their job.

The illegality of prostitution in itself can make it titillating (for those who find the sense of disapproval and illicit thrill titillating).  The success of Belle du Jour, best-selling books and two TV series and counting, and the eroticism of ‘high class’ prostitutes introduces a peculiar dichotomy; on the one hand she is titillating, naughty, the ‘acceptable’ face of selling sex, on the other hand she is selling sex, she is a prostitute and all that job title implies.  How is it that she can remain illegal and yet be so acceptable?  Many of those people who enjoy the books and TV series are those who wish prostitution to remain illegal.  As long as the idea of a prostitute who freely chose that job is fictionalised, it seems it is acceptable.

Of course, legalising sex work will not result in overnight societal change.  I believe any results from such changes may take two or three generations to begin to emerge.  But for the safety of those already in the industry, for the perpetuation of gendered and homophobic stereotyping, for the right to body autonomy we all have, for the development of a sexually non-judgemental society, for all the reasons I have given, legalising and regulating sex work should happen.

My name is Tina and I am a Sex Positive Feminist

For some reason, this statement is likely to cause offense, outrage and confusion amongst many people; opposition to this may even unite groups most normally seen in the media as being in opposing camps.  Many people may not even know what “Sex Positive” means.  I only found out about this definition of beliefs and activism about 18 months ago, and upon researching it realised as a label it broadly defines how I feel about sex, female (and male) autonomy and attitudes towards sex.  I find such labels useful as jumping-off points to discussion, as we all define terms in different ways (although for some reason ‘feminism’ seems to be defined in mainstream media and society by those who oppose equality rather than those who define themselves as ‘feminists’; I suppose that’s only to be expected, the oppressor/privileged sets the agenda for the society over which it exercises its privilege, after all).

So, what is sex positivism?  I could post a ton of net links to various sites to explain it, but you don’t read my blog (all two or three of you) to get someone else’s ideas.  Here, then, are mine.

1. Sex Positivism is about informed consenting sexual activity.
2. Sex Positivism is not about moral judgements.
3. Sex Positivism is about legalising sex work.
4. Sex Positivism is about fostering healthy attitudes towards one’s body and ones sexuality.
5. Sex Positivism is about autonomy over one’s own body.
6. Sex Positivism is about accepting that people, all people, of all shapes, sizes, sexualities etc. are sexual beings and have a right to express their sexuality without moral judgement or impingement (see point 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5; in fact, these points all cross-over as you will read).

Guess which one usually gets the most complaints and causes the most outrage in debates?  Yes, that’s right, point 3.  Let’s take it point by point, saving 3 for last as it is the most juicy.

1 – INFORMED CONSENT (I’m capitalising because this is VERY IMPORTANT!).

This is the primary, number one, consideration, from which all else follows.  Sex Positive means informed, consenting sexual activity.  This precludes those who are unable, for whatever reason, to give informed consent.  Children cannot give informed consent.  Animals cannot give informed consent.  Trafficked slaves forced into sex work cannot give consent (and personally I dispute the definition of these people being in sex work – it is commercialised rape).  Anyone under any form of external duress directly related to the situation cannot give informed consent; for example putting pressure via emotional or physical violence disempowers, and those under duress cannot give informed consent.  Abuse of a position of power (college professor and student/boss and employee) by the consentee removes the ability of the consenter to give informed consent.

Informed consent means having all the information one feels is necessary to oneself in order to give informed consent to a sexual activity.  This means knowing all the information which may exist which may cause harm to the consenter if they knew the same and which would alter their decision to give consent – such as whether the potential sexual partner has a sexually transmitted disease or a partner with whom they do not have an open relationship.  The decision whether to consent to sexual activity is then made with all the necessary facts available.  However, some people consent if they know a partner is not in an open relationship, and informed consent does not mean there is a universal moral rule which can apply.  Different folks like different strokes (phnar), what is acceptable for one will not be for another.

Informed consent means the ability to give the same – if a person is very intoxicated on whatever substance THEY CANNOT GIVE INFORMED CONSENT.  If in doubt, don’t do it, even if they tell you the next morning they really wanted to (which, if so, wahay!  Informed consent obtained, let the sexy-time begin!).

Informed consent means knowing one’s own sexuality, what one is comfortable with, and feeling one is in a safe environment and one is able to give that consent.  It does not describe the behaviour to which that consent is given.

Most importantly, the only way informed consent can be given is if sex education is given from as soon as children are old enough to ask question, in an age-appropriate fashion of course.  After all, how can a person give or deny consent if they don’t know what they are or are not consenting to, and the implications of the same?  Informed consent requires information; the clue is in the title!

Informed consent is the ability to say “yes”, to say “no”, and to say “maybe, but I want to know more first before I can decide” and to know that that decision will be respected and adhered to.

2 – Not making moral judgements.

Bloody religionists, coming along, spoiling everything with their judgemental, sexist, party-pooping…

Of course, not all religious people are judgmental (although it is in the job description especially for those involved in the organisation of religious beliefs).  However, most laws and social norms surrounding sex and sexual activity have their basis in religion, as that is historically from where our law derives.  Non-heteronormative, non-marital, non-male sexual activity, that’s what I’m talking about here.  Such judgements create misery and deny love and sexual pleasure.  These are (given point 1) not crimes (or shouldn’t be if they are, as they are victimless and the laws derive from prejudice) and are discriminatory.

There are differing standards in our society for sexual behaviours (by which I mean with whom you have sex not the actual positions said horizontal jiggling may include) – women are sex objects and have a passive role, whereas men are sex subjects and take the active role.  As for non-heterosexual sexual activity, well when such relationships are not accorded equality in law is it any surprise social judgement persists in condemning them.  Slut-shaming, victim-blaming, anti-choice crusading, hate crimes, homophobic violence – all these come from irrational moral judgements deriving from religious and social judgement.  All are wrong and infringe the basic human right a person has to express their sexuality in any way which is their own.

Sex positivity recognises we all have different sexual desires, dreams, wants and needs.  It is about allowing those needs, accepting the difference and not judging, condemning or denying the liberty people should have to meet those needs in a healthy and informed way.

3 – Legalising Sex Work

All sex work should be legalised.  This, however, is to be subject to its own blog post, as I just KNOW there will be controversy.  If anyone actually reads this blog, that is.  Otherwise, it’ll be useful for me to refer to in future debates.  Mass debates may be particularly fun…

4 – Healthy Attitudes towards Sex and Sexuality

“What is a ‘healthy’ attitude?” I hear you both cry (having lost one reader since paragraph 1 of this epic).  “Good question” I respond, feeling sure I am talking to myself.  In the context of this blog, I expect to develop hirsute palms and go blind very shortly.

In my opinion, a healthy attitude towards sex and sexuality is one which does not judge, has no moral imposition, is one which knows oneself and what one wants and doesn’t want, and has confidence and understanding in one’s ability to give informed consent.

A healthy attitude is one which does not hate one’s body because it does not conform to society’s ideal of what one should look like.  Physical conformity is impossible for the vast majority of society, whatever the norm happens to be, because humans come in a huge variety of shapes, sizes, shades, and physicalities.  There is no norm other than that which is socially created and perpetuated.

It is impossible to have a truly healthy sex life if you hate how you look.  You can never really relax and allow your body to feel the experience, if you are constantly worrying if your stomach is going to flop, if your breasts are in your armpits instead of pointing ceiling-ward (of course if they are doing this whilst you are on your front, I would recommend seeing your GP pretty fast), if you think your penis is not going to touch the sides (although if this is a comment on the size of your partner’s vagina/anus/mouth/nostril I think you may have a personality rather than self-image problem and will be contributing to your partner’s lack of healthy attitude should you mention it, you asshole), or if you think your body is in any way unattractive and therefore unworthy of the person to whom you are gifting the experience of sex with it.

So many things affect how we see ourselves – gender stereotyping, the beauty myth, the constant conflation of sexuality with gender, homophobia, transphobia, cisgenderism, racism, fashion and economic snobbery, societal assumption that healthy = thin (although that is only a narrow band of thinness and is frequently contradictory making the whole thing more confusing and damaging to your psyche; for the male physique healthy = muscular is not so prevalent but is on the rise in mainstream culture), and image/celebrity obsessed culture all have a negative effect.  Yet when I look around, I see myriad couplings/grouping of a huge variety of shapes and sizes.  Physicality is not ‘one size fits all’, it just seems that way.  Nor is sexuality.

Sexuality – why is it types of sexuality are legislated against or ignored?  There are so many definitions currently.  Here are a few:

Pansexuality, bisexuality, bicuriosity, heterosexuality, homosexuality, lesbianism, asexuality, non-sexuality, polysexuality.

Some of these definitions will change, grow, and come into and out of usage as gender definitions change, grow, and come into and out of usage.  People define themselves in whatever way seems best to fit them at that time of life and depending upon their environment and upbringing may not be as free to express themselves as they would wish.  No sexuality is ‘wrong’, to those who hold a Sex Positive view.  To morally judge the gender of the partner, or the sexuality of certain genders, is not sex positive.  It’s not healthy, either for oneself or for one’s society.

5 – Body Autonomy

We are all the owners of our own bodies, and no-one else’s.  We do not have the right, ever, to dictate what one person will do with their own body, be it tattoo it, pierce it, have a medical procedure or not, have an abortion or not, or have sex or not.  In fact, if we remove that autonomy with regard to sex, that is called RAPE and is illegal.

What we do with our own bodies are decisions influenced by our environments, our families, our perceptions of ourselves and others, the judgements we may or may not receive both before and after acting, our intents and desires, our fears and negativities; myriad influences in fact.  But they are OUR decisions to make.  No-one can, or should, make them for you.

These decisions, of course, are entirely based on point 1.

6 – Acceptance

There are probably as many different types of sexual activity as there are people engaging in the same.  Even if the label is the same for two couples/groups, what actually happens will never be exactly the same (although I don’t think I ever want to actually PROVE that statement…).  What people choose to do within the privacy of their own sex lives may be shocking to others, or boring, or incomprehensible, but that is irrelevant to anyone not directly involved in the sexual activity.

Sex Positive means acknowledging and accepting sexual behaviours vary.  It doesn’t mean ‘tolerating’ as ‘tolerance’ implies judgement and disapproval or approval as deemed appropriate by the judger (who of course is not involved in the actual sexual activity and is probably jealous that you are getting some and they aren’t, so yah boo sucks to them!).  Acceptance – pure and simple.  No judgement, no disapproval or approval.  Acknowledgement and acceptance, and moving on.

Okay, this post turned out a lot longer than anticipated, so this is part 1.  Part 2, which will focus on point 3 and the legalising sex work issue, will come with a conclusion personal to me.  Hopefully it won’t take me too long to produce, but hey, no-one is actually reading this blog anyway, so I guess it doesn’t matter.

Until next time, sweet non-existent reader. *kissy face*!

Why is blogging so DIFFICULT sometimes?

I have been trying to write a particular blog post for about six months now.  It is on Sex Positive Feminism, my personal beliefs with regard this, and is something I believe in very strongly.  It also creates a huge amount of controversy whenever it is talked about, from what I have seen on various discussion boards and in myriad groups.

For someone with such outspoken views, who has strong opinions and is quite vocal/literate about them, this will probably come as a surprise.  However, we tend to surround ourselves with people who broadly agree with our viewpoints on various topics, and if there is a massive disagreement about something which is a core fundamental principle to our being then those people tend to be on the periphery of our social circles.  Debate is rare, argument (unless our personalities desire such things) rarer still.

I am a person who does not enjoy confrontation or argument.  I have only recently (in the last 10 years or so, on a sliding scale of “getting more so”) become increasingly confident in my knowledge and therefore in my opinions.  I am still quite shocked (naively so, and I can be VERY naïve) that people can actually disagree with me!  Fundamental to my principles and therefore myself is the belief in equality and when someone disagrees with me with regard to equality I am shaken to the core.  I always try to understand the other side(s) (I have yet to debate an issue which has only two sides) position(s) but sometimes have found it incredibly difficult to see how they can hold to such principles.  It does not mean I will ever stop trying, although acknowledging people are prejudiced and that blind faith will rule some people is quite difficult for me.

So far, the most controversial topic I have instigated is the debate regarding the titles by which women are addressed in the English-speaking world (Ms/Miss/Mrs); my post can be found by clicking on the blue highlighted words.  Every time it is discussed, it creates controversy.  I understand why, it is a topic fundamental to people’s hearts, but I do not really understand the controversy about it as the legal facts are plain and the inequality is obvious.  However, the controversy has taught me valuable lessons in listening, understanding and opening myself up to other points of view, if only to determine eventually that my position is as I stated, fundamental to my core principles and representative of my central core of being.

I don’t like anger though.  I don’t want to upset people, or hurt them.  My wording is carefully chosen to avoid doing so, yet somehow controversy finds me.  Why is this?  Is the belief in equality so offensive to some people that they feel duty-bound to insult, abuse, deride and wish quite nasty physical violence on people?  I am lucky not to have received such abuse yet, but from my knowledge of other feminist bloggers I know this is a matter of time.  Unless, of course, I remain attractive as a blog to only 5 or so readers, all of whom are friends.

The Sex Positive blog (which is going to be split into two, possibly three, parts on account of length) is the hardest one I have written so far.  I know, having taken part in previous discussions, that it is a topic that angers MANY people.  It angers people with whom I identify, whose views I respect and agree with.  Feminists are often angered by it (although as I have written before, feminism is an ideology which is not an amorphous unchanging identification).  I know it could upset those I care about, and that is not something I ever wish to do.

So why write it, or indeed any blog which might cause upset, anger or offense?  Quite simply, because it is another belief system fundamental to my principles and myself.  Because it is incredibly important in the fight for equality and to my belief that understanding is vital to advancement and education of everyone.  Because, ultimately, my fear of controversy, confrontation, embarrassment and criticism is not as important as my belief in stating my views, opening myself up to alternative points of view in debate and furthering my and other’s understanding of people and society as a whole.

I have to.  It’s another fundamental principle of my core being.  That’s all.