Tue, 2010-06-22 17:36
Katherine Chen, guest contributor at Em & Lo makes a compelling, progressive case for abstinence as personal gratification rather than the traditional duty-bound approach where it’s all about “saving yourself” for a husband… i.e. for someone else’s gratification.
Virginity has always been a very significant part of who I am. I can’t deny my mother certainly influenced my perspective on sex: she raved about how all my female classmates were sluts and whores just for going out with a boy on Saturday night. But I’ve also had two friends get pregnant and then undergo abortions before they turned 18. The pain and agony they went through by taking a chance on someone they hoped was Mr. Right (who turned out to be Mr. Wrong) did not seem worth it at all.
...
Despite my fairly old school views, I don’t think virginity should be viewed as a treasure, much less a curse or a stigma. The fact that female virginity is so prized among certain (if not all) cultures confirms that women are still viewed as sex objects. I’m not down with that. Nor do I think losing one’s virginity should be considered an automatic rite of passage for young people, like attaining one’s first driver’s license or graduating from high school. When the situation and circumstances are genuinely right, it can happen quite naturally and in its own sweet time, but until then you should have the right to protect your feelings and your body without undergoing external pressures to conform to any arbitrary sexual standards — whether that’s doing it before you hit a certain age to avoid being seen as a freak or not doing it until you get married because of some religious ideology.
She said it here.
But as part of her clear-eyed endorsement of abstinence she also addresses a downside of waiting for the “right” person that I hadn’t considered before.
Studies have shown (see here and here) that when women don’t receive the relationship they anticipated after losing their virginity, they feel like their sexual power has been taken away from them. Of course, there is also the emotional and spiritual devastation that comes with feeling deceived, even if that was not the intention of the other party.
She said it here.
I think this is a really cool post. Also an important one because she’s saying if you’re going to go there then you need to locate the gratification of abstinence in yourself instead of the usual (basically universal, no-sex class) way of “saving yourself” for the benefit of another.
The word “sex-positive” gets tossed around a lot and there’s obviously some disagreement about it’s meaning. In its most original sense it doesn’t mean being open to everything early and often. Which is great because that would rule out a lot of people’s positive experience of their sexualities. Instead it meant being tolerant of other people’s sexualities and comfortable with and able to express your own sexuality whatever that might be*. I’ve pointed out in the past that that means making room for asexuality. What she’s done is make a great case for abstinence as it’s own form of erotic anticipation and enjoyment and as an expression of one’s own sexuality. That’s cool.
Quick, really important note… actually really important in terms of the discussion here: abstinence doesn’t have to equal virginity. Which brings me to the most important part of her post.
“Studies have shown … that when women don’t receive the relationship they anticipated after losing their virginity, they feel like their sexual power has been taken away from them.”
I think that’s right, and I think it’s really critical to get how much that belief in the value or “power” of women’s virginity influences our notions of “innate” gender difference. Because when you’re raised nearly from birth with the expectation that you’ve got this property value that’s independent of… and maybe even more important than… everything else about you it’s going to overload your actual experience of it with all sort of cultural and emotional freight. Even if it’s not always treated as an outright ‘treasure’ it’s still something you’re expected to assess every potential partnership in terms of whether this is the person you’re going to “bestow” or “give” it to. Or who will “take” it from you.
And since you’re only allowed one chance (remember, traditionally virginity is valued way more than abstinence itself) you’re just wonderfully setup to have that feeling of loss of power because mythology notwithstanding sex really is just sex: the next day you really do still have to “chop wood, carry water” as the Zen guys say about enlightenment.
And once it’s gone it’s gone, and if the lights don’t flicker all over the Eastern Seaboard when you stop being a virgin then you’re setup to feel screwed.
And here’s my main point: whereas one can “lose” one’s virginity only once, if someone discovers a preference for it he or she can resume abstinence the next day! And, contrary to end-of-the-world protestations by Laura Sessions Stepp and the whole used-chewing-gum crowd, be very little the worse for wear.
Aside: That’s another problem with the standard virginity/wait for the right man theory — unlike abstinence, once you stop being a virgin you’re supposed to lose not just your virginity value but your ability to own your sexuality at all: you’ve given it to someone else!
* with the obvious caveats, e.g. respecting partner’s decisions, adulthood, etc.
