Messages about sex and sexual power are all around us. When we open a magazine, flip on the TV or cruise the internet, we are inundiated with mixed messages about sex. On the one hand, we are told that dressing provocatively and pleasing your man are the most important things to bring to a relationships. Cosmo gives us instructions on how to suck, lick and tug every part of his body so that he'll be begging for more. "Gossip Girl" and "90210" depict sexually active teens who aren't afraid to switch partners episode to episode. And who can forget those models Abercrombie and Fitch hires to stand shirtless in storefronts as eye candy for every fantasizing pubescent girl? On the other hand, we receive messages from parents, teachers and even boyfriends that women should not be openly sexual, as they will just appear to be STD-ridden and "slutty." Our schools promote abstinence and major politicians denounce the sexual objectification of women in rap songs and music videos. What are we to believe? Is the Cosmo "fun, fearless female" a slut? Or is she in control of her body and therefore carefree and powerful? On the flip side, if a woman does not follow the Cosmo guide, is she necessarily a prude? Or is she simply exercising the same sexual power that more fearless women exhibit?
As I read Douglas's chapter "Sex 'R Us," I couldn't help but think of Charlotte from "Sex and the City." Charlotte, who wears pearls and lives on Park Avenue in her preppy apartment, is immediately identified as the "prude." Charlotte is not a virgin, nor is she even close. She is sexually active, yet prefers to downplay her sexual activity to appear "lady like." Charlotte is often teased by the others because of her girlish tendencies and her insistence on mouthing words like "sex" and "pussy." However, I can't help but wonder how Charlotte is labeled a prude when she is clearly sexually active and engaging in the same activity as her three best friends. In fact, it is not until the fourth season that Charlotte settles down, and later rejects her then-husband because of his inability to hold an erejection. If Charlotte is a prude, what are women who are not sexually active? It seems this label is unwarranted and shows that women who are virgins are somehow weird or different.
Furthermore, Cosmo too places sexually inactive females in the same category as somehow different from all other women. In an advice column titled "How can I tell a guy I am a virgin and not freak him out?" Cosmo tells a 26-year-old virgin that her "um, inexperience" should be downplayed so as not to scare potential boyfriends away who may be scared of "responsibility" or "committment." To this sex-crazed magazine, those who choose to wait are somehow weird and will scare the only ones who matter (potential sexual partners) away.
Navigating these mixed messages about sex is difficult and often places women in difficult positions. Should teens wear low-rise jeans and bustier tops to appeal to boys? Or should they hold off on sex, only to appear weird and sexually inactive in the future? It seems the media promotes different conceptions of what is sexually acceptable and what is sexually inacceptable and it is up to us to filter these messages as best as we can.
http://www.cosmopolitan.com/sex-love/advice/how-can-i-tell-him-im-a-virgin
I really like your point about the double bind women experience. It is ridiculous that Charlotte it labeled as a prude just because she is reserved when discussing sex. I would think that most people would then be considered prude in comparison to Samantha. Just because someone does not divulge every detail about their sex life, it is unfair to automatically classify them as a virgin or inexperienced. I also really liked how you mentioned the mixed messages about sex. I would not be surprised to see a rise in teen pregnancies and teenagers with STDs given the media’s hyper-sexuality and our schools and government’s disregard subject, sub-par sex-ed curriculums, and promotion of abstinence.
ReplyDeleteBy S. Hjalmarson