Comments
Please wait...
Comments are closed.
Commenting on this item is available only to members of the site. You can sign in here or create an account here.
More In Columns
Popular Articles
is a proud member of the
network
network
All contents © Noisy Creek, Inc.
800 Maynard Ave S, Suite 200, Seattle, WA 98134
800 Maynard Ave S, Suite 200, Seattle, WA 98134
It doesn't sound like his wife had sex; it sounds as if she was raped.
That said, I wonder if there was a reason the wife didn't want to apply the "sex" label other than a too-limited definition of sex. Perhaps drugs or alcohol were involved.
"He applied the vibrator, she had an orgasm, and then she called a halt to the proceedings. They went back to school, and that was the beginning and the end of their relationship."
In other words, when she said stop, he stopped. No other indication that she said stop before and that he ignored her, or that she wasn't into it or consenting in any way. So how in the world is that rape?
I gave a blow job to a boy in a park. I don't consider this to be sex. I consider every other blow job I've ever given to be sex.
It was sex. I just don't like to think about it, because, while I was there willingly - retrospectively, it was a pretty bad idea.
So yeah, I think that's what is going on. If its fun, we call it sex - if we regret it, it becomes a hazy mistake. That's okay. I think I might just go on denying that anything happened - but I know this is my own personal denial, and doesn't reflect any kind of objective truth. The wife in question has a right to define her own experiences any way she likes - and its okay if no one else agrees with her.
and #3? seriously? i hope you never learn how far off you are.
Yes I could be wrong, but I doubt it. Lots of ladies don't learn how to say "no" in highschool and it's pushy guys like this one who teach them how! Usually after a few times of going farther than you wanted to.
@18: Interesting point, but I wouldn't hammer it too hard. Honestly, when I read that letter, it sounded like a typical situation of husband and wife having one of those stalemate debates, and to end on a playful, amicable note, they decide to take it to someone they both respect and find entertaining.
While we can only guess what was going on with the wife, I think it's wrong to assume that she must have felt bad about the encounter, and extremely misguided to cry rape over it. Who knows how it came up in conversation?
Should the husband/wife have asked the question? A couple of people were offended the husband didn't just let the question go ('since it made her uncomfortable'). Hm. So do you think he'd submit this question without asking her first? And without being sure she's OK with it? Could be, but do you know this couple so well? To me, it seems they were just laughing at funny things that happened in their sex lives (something I and my wife have done more than once, too)
I guess there's still an undercurrent of 'women are poor little flowers whose personalities can break at the slightest sexual difficulty, so be veeeerrry careful with them!' going in America. What a pity. Women, of course, are stronger than that.
I work at your publisher, assuming you are working with Plume again.
I may yet have a chance to meet you and thank you for getting me through my closeted years.
Finish that Manuscript so you will have to come to my office!
Ever hear the story about the boy who cried "Wolf!"?
Read it again.
I know enjoyed reading it.
*scratches needle off the record*
I kid...great advice as always you Savage beast you... ;-)
I don't see anything clear about it, unless the letter was edited down (which it likely was). From what I can read, it sounds like she either thought it was a funny, surprising encounter from her naive youth that was closer to mutual masturbation than sex... or, as others have mentioned, she went to someone's place for lunch and he, having other plans, assaulted her.
Reading Paglia for a perspective on Feminism is almost like telling someone to read Ann Coulter for a woman's perspective on politics, imo.
:)
And as a side and lesser important note: A new book! Whoo Hoo!
And this is how I discovered the difference between naked (i.e. not wearing any clothes) and naked (i.e. bearing your intimate soul), from those folks that would, after a satisfying orgasm go holy shit, I'm totally naked in front of a stranger, and beat a hasty retreat. Plenty of folks are eager to get naked with someone new, but are reserved about (and seem to be taken by surprise when) they wind up getting naked with them as well.
By these definitions, and by the limited information we have in DEFINE's account, rape was not involved.
* To clarify: On the contingency that you are unable to consent, then it is assumed you don't, except to life-saving care (i.e. first aid) in which case you automatically consent without a DNR.
So any idea how those of us who like to get naked (baring our souls) can avoid those who freak out when getting naked(no clothes) turns in to naked (bared)?
Any telltale signs?
If someone asks me when the last time I had sex was, I don't refer to the last time I got a handjob or a blowjob, I refer to the last time I had my penis in someone's vagina.
It's all personal opinion, I suppose.
As for sex or not, Dan's description is not quite the same. What if she kept her panties on? Would it be sex or not. What if she didn't have an orgasm? Would it be sex or not. What if they made out and he only stuck his hand in for a second? Would that be sex. I say not sex in this case. Sex may be hard to define clearly, but if i just fingered a girl to orgasm, I would not consider that sex. if a girl jacks me off, i would not consider that sex. I would call it a hand job.
Posted by Dal Tiger on September 23, 2009 at 6:06 AM
If the guy did not take his clothes off, did not even take his dick out of his pants and play with it, all thru the foreplay, vibrator play and orgasm, he probably did not WANT to have genital intercourse with her. Go to CraigsList to the M4M site and see how many guys are into offering blowjobs and want no reciprocation. Quite a few. Why wouldn't there be a few straight guys who just want to pleasure an attractive woman? He could have been self-conscious about his body, or genital herpes or warts, or his dick size or not being able to get it up, which also might explain why the wife called it quits. To me it sounds like she inadvertently got turned on by an unattractive guy and knew she would have to end it sooner or later. So she ended it abruptly and for all we know the guy is still jacking off to the memory to this day.
But you're right, 32! I love B.C., best Prez ever, but he did say it, and the vernacular definition has been quite vague ever since.
As to Ms. Define's situation, I say she had sex, he didn't; he just helped... Whatta guy!
Thank you, attitude devant @62. To answer your question, I don't know how to avoid them entirely, but you can improve your chances with more experienced lovers. Hot college students, while in that window of fresh hotness and age of consent tend to not know themselves very well, hence their hard and soft limits aren't as clearly defined. Those who've been around a few more times are more inclined to trust that while they're basking in post orgasm nakedness, the world is probably not going to end.
I think the best tact when dealing with young people is to exercise immense amounts of patience. Telegraph all your moves and check in often to make sure he / she really wants this. (This is also the standard tact before beating the snot out of someone with a doeskin flogger, which is, in itself, a common technique to create religious experiences and relationship disasters all at the same time.)
Oh, you know @65, I think expanding the definition of sex for the sake of common parlance is a good idea since there are plenty of social and safety reasons not to engage in coitus, yet we, as per all mammals, are really cuddly beings. As things are, adolescents still regard fucking as the holy grail of transcendence to adulthood. If sex was represented by a broader range of activities, kids could experiment and explore physical intimacy at a safer and more comfortable pace.
Also, as Dan points out the more you define as sex, the more sex you will have.
Myself, I just love, love, love playing with girl bits and do not require reciprocation at all (much to the confusion of plenty of my partners), and when someone lets me have my way with of her, even if it's only my oral or manual way, I consider it having sex. It's not coitus, but it's definitely sex.
To post #3- you trivialize sexual assault and rape by applying it to any situation in which a person later regrets having a consentual encounter. Women are not children and to suggest that anything they later wish they had not participated in means that they were unfairly coerced implies that we're just too weak to decide anything for ourselves.
If a man claimed that he had been "raped" by a woman with a great line and transitory appeal who gave him a blow job he later regretted, it would be laughable. In fact, women have been giving their significant others, "I couldn't help it, she overwhelmed me," excuse the disbelieving laugh since time began.
Sexual abuse is very real and horrific, as is child abuse. Nothing in the post suggested this person was abused and certainly not that she was a child. Don't make women into passive, powerless subjects in their relations with men. It's unfair to all men and women.
To post #3- you trivialize sexual assault and rape by applying it to any situation in which a person later regrets having a consentual encounter. Women are not children and to suggest that anything they later wish they had not participated in means that they were unfairly coerced implies that we're just too weak to decide anything for ourselves.
If a man claimed that he had been "raped" by a woman with a great line and transitory appeal who gave him a blow job he later regretted, it would be laughable. In fact, women have been giving their significant others, "I couldn't help it, she overwhelmed me," excuse the disbelieving laugh since time began.
Sexual abuse is very real and horrific, as is child abuse. Nothing in the post suggested this person was abused and certainly not that she was a child. Don't make women into passive, powerless subjects in their relations with men. It's unfair to all men and women.
If penetration has to occur then no wonder all those homosexual men and women are so angry all the time. They hardly ever have sex, just alot of messing around with their mouths and a few toys.
@71-- I agree wholeheartedly with the idea that rape is not a clear-cut either/or black&white issue. Say someone has a trauma history-- a really common reaction to being put in a similar sexual situation again is to panic, freeze up, and automatically comply with the other person in unconscious hopes of not getting hurt too badly this time. To someone who's not bothering to look too carefully, that can look an awful lot like consent-- after all, the person didn't say "no." But s/he also did NOT want to have that sex, and was likely badly upset and hurt by it. I think that a too-limited definition of "rape" leaves such a person entirely out of the equation-- such a person really doesn't FIT into "raped" ("s/he clearly said no") or "not raped" ("s/he clearly consented") if those are the only options considered legitimate.
btw I got totally hard reading Dan's subsequent speculation of picking up the husband in a bar & fisting him elbow deep. Just sayin'.
Furthermore, defining sex by orgasm means that roughly 25% of women have never had sex. And as a woman who has a great deal of difficulty reaching orgasm, that means that I've only ever had sex with my present partner.... a claim I would strongly dispute.
How any individual defines sex is entirely up to him or her. But on the whole, I think our society has a decidedly heteronormative and puritanical bias.
I agree it's a *little* weird to call a blowjob "sex." I, however, think the problem isn't the act itself, but the fact that it's one-way in terms of direct, physical stimulation (allowing for the delightful people out there who get off on giving).
"Having sex", to me, always carried the connotation of pleasure for both parties, because there's no other way of describing sex. No one ever calls it "receiving sex" or "giving sex."
I definitely call oral or manual sex "sex" if I received as well as gave it in the same session.
From ASM's letter:
"Now, I think any time you have an orgasm you've had sex, and if someone else is present, even if they're clothed, you definitely had sex."
Ok, his wording is a little weird, since is this someone directly involved? Or just standing in a corner?
"My wife's view is that since he never got his clothes off and she never saw his cock, she really didn't have sex."
This is definitely crazy. Maybe it's just poor wording on her part too, but *seeing* his cock has to happen? What if it was dark? What if she wore a blindfold? And you don't have to be missing clothes to have sex.
So did ASM's wife have sex with the dude? Not *really* since she never gave him any physical stimulation (beyond kissing), but considering the definitions he and his wife are offering, I think the jury is definitely closer to agreeing with ASM than with his wife.
But according to that view, if my boyfriend wears a condom and we have vaginal-penile intercourse, it's not sex. If either of us is sterile, it's not sex either. If he fucks me in the ass, it's not sex. If we were both women or both men, we'd never ever have sex.
Yeah.
Now I'm certain there are still 70s-style feminists out there who would call this rape. After all, she's not doing anything to me and certainly says nothing to assent to any of this. And that sounds pretty much like what happened back in the day. Seems like not only sex, but pretty hot too!
Sex is penetration penis to vagina. Or, if you're gay, mouth to penis. I don't even call a blow job a girl gives a guy sex. I wouldn't say I had "sex" with someone I gave a blow job to -- that would be everything "but".
I know you're extremely liberal, but come on... vibrators do not = sex.
Here's to spreading frothy Santorum!
The more Repigs made to look ridiculous, the better!
What about just plain ol' male or female solo masturbation? Is that sex?
AND HOW THE HECK CAN YOU SAY MALE TO MALE ORAL IS SEX,
AND FEMALE TO MALE IS NOT?
Sounds sexist rationalization to me...
Or how about:
"After Marriage Equality in Iowa, Are Republican Rivals Prepared to Lick Santorum?"??
"Mike Duvall Resigns after Bragging about Leaky Lobbyist. What Role did Santorum Play"
"Still Reeling from Gay Marriage Court Ruling, Is Iowa Preparing for a Santorum Backlash?"
Please Jesus I promise I won't stick my penis anywhere bad if you let this happen. Let Santorum run, for the sake of all that is holy. I beseech you.
Also, we should come up with a Huckabee too, just in case he runs, and a Romney. Since Romney is a cock that won't go away, the romney could be the 4 hour erection that won't go away after overdosing on viagra. no clue what to call huckabee but it should be done.
"I stole some viagra from my catholic priest. After we warmed up with some saddlebacking and cleaned up the santorum, my friend with benefits wanted to huckabee. After I finished huckabeeing her bush, I had a romney and had to take an embarrassing trip to the ER."
As for Senator Frothy Mixture, let him try, just try, to gain the GOP nomination. The American public has proven it doesn't want a church = state politician anywhere near the White House. He'll get palined*, for sure. He's a Catholic G. W. Bush.
*If "bork" can be a transitive verb, surely "palin" can be.
I've always defined sex as any genital contact of at least one person contacting any body part or device of another person. In other words, somebody's getting genital stimulation with the help of somebody else. Doesn't matter if anyone orgasms or not.