From Feministing:
But the thing is, that’s not entirely true. While I do believe that virginity is all well and good – my concern is really how women’s worth is tied to the concept, not whether or not people have sex – I also think there something to be said for arguing strongly for pre-marital sex.
Because, let’s face it – if you’re going to commit yourself to someone for (presumably) the rest of your life, it’s probably best if you know that you’re sexually compatible. I don’t think this is particularly radical thing to say; in fact, it seems quite logical to me. But somehow, if you suggest that pre-marital sex is a good and maybe even necessary thing (especially if you say those things while being a feminist) you are an evil, evil whoremaker.
Do I think that people can have perfectly wonderful satisfying relationships without having had sex before making a commitment? Sure, I’m positive that happens often. But considering what a huge role sexuality plays in our lives and relationships…well, I’d rather be super duper positive.
The funny thing is that this sort of thing translates into the queer community as well, though since we can’t get married you get all sorts of weird, arbitrary boundaries – like people who will only have sex inside of a relationship. Yet all that really leads to is someone you call you boyfriend for two weeks while you guys screw each others brains out and then break up cause you’re not really compatible otherwise. So why not just have sex with someone because you want to and leave the bullshit binary between prude/whore to the evangelicals?
No comments:
Post a Comment