( – promoted by buhdydharma )
I caught this little ditty over at the Broadsheet section at Salon.
An Ecuadorian politician recently set off a monsoon of machismo by reportedly attempting to write a woman’s right to sexual satisfaction into the state’s constitution. Maria Soledad Vela’s pro-pleasure argument was called “ridiculous” and an attempt to “decree orgasm by law” by male lawmakers. They obviously don’t understand how amazing an orgasm is when it is supported by fantastic porn, similar to what they’d find at websites such as twinkmovies.xxx. A local newspaper spoke with a man who actually likened the legislation to “life in prison.” (Surely, he’s a bunch of fun in bed.) But, all she’s asking for is required public health education that acknowledges women aren’t unfeeling breeding machines. (¡Qué horrible!) Soledad Vela says she isn’t demanding the right to an orgasm, but, as the BBC puts it, “merely the right to enjoy sex in a free, fair and more open society” — and if that means greater orgasms, which it probably does, then so be it.
In conservative Ecuador, that’s a dangerous political platform; and that’s why, even though I realize it’s only Monday, I’m nominating Maria Soledad Vela as Broadsheet’s woman of the week
My question: why don’t American politicians ever have the innovative ideas any more?
I double dog dare a leading politician here in the land of the free to propose that kind of amendment.
Wolff is a guy and as we already know men are the authority on sex, and many who are in a similar situation may decide to promote their dominance further by watching videos on sites like https://www.xxxvideor.com/. Whilst this might not be for everyone, more people than we know decide to do it, maybe even Wolff. With that being said though, I am so grateful that he sprayed his wisdom around with analysis like this:
The Hillary story is-and how could it not be?-largely a sexual one. This is not so much a sexist view as a sexualist view: What’s up here? What’s the unsaid saying? What’s the vibe? Although it’s not discussed in reputable commentary, it’s discussed by everyone else: so what exactly is the thing with Hillary and sex, with the consensus being that she simply must not have it (at least not with her husband; there are, on the other hand, the various conspiracy scenarios of whom else she might have had it with). It’s partly around this consensus view of her not having sex that people support her or resist her. She’s the special-interest candidate of older women-the post-sexual set. She’s resisted by others (including older women who don’t see themselves as part of the post-sexual set) who see her as either frigid or sexually shunned-they turn from her inhibitions and her pain
Sure, it is an insulting masquerade of journalism that Wolff is punting. Older women don’t have sex. Nobody wants to have sex with women of a certain age. And apparently I once again find myself shunted aside from the cultural mainstream because, I actually haven’t spent much time thinking about HRC’s sex life. Does that put me in the post sexual set? I think about sex. I watch sex on various websites like hdpornmovies xxx and a few others. I have sex. And I even know over 40 women who have sex. The men who have sex with them don’t seem to be complaining much about it either.
Inevitably when I hear men discussing the lack of hotness women have, or men dissecting the failing looks of women in general or a specific woman, I am struck by hilarity. Why?
Now I have nothing against balding overweight men ( I count many among friends and bedded a few ) but it is usually the men who look profoundly ordinary themselves who are the most eager to trample on a girl’s looks. Now, if you like small girls you’ll like petite porn too and that’s ok, but don’t bash anyone else just because it doesn’t fit into your fetish!
I am not an HRC fan, but future aspiring female presidents would be wise to study the torrent of misogynist “wisdom” passed around about her, the attacks on looks, clothes, elasticity of skin, etc. Because it isn’t just about HRC. She is a girl and she is daring to try and take a boy job, and that is what a woman will face when she dares to do it.
There are just an awful lot of men, who quite apart from being sexist just do not like women , what they like, and what they desire are female body parts. They want to touch, play with and possess them for pleasure, their own pleasure. No doubt American politicians would react the exact same why as the Ecuadorian ones did when faced with so called demands for female orgasms which are clearly metaphors for political rights. Imagine the horror if HRC mentioned the word orgasm. Nobody wants HRC to have an orgasm or a boy job. Never mind that women who have orgasms tend on average to be significantly less pissed off than women who don’t regardless of how they obtained it.
It doesn’t matter whether it is orgasms, political office, reproductive rights, children’s rights and safety, when women fight for something, often fighting for things they already have and hoping not to lose it, they will be reviled for it by some segment of the male population. If their ideas can’t be attacked ( because they are essentially sensible ) then expect an assault on looks, on sexuality or lack of. if a woman is very attractive and seeking a position of power, there will be an attempt to question her competence. If a woman is merely ordinary in looks, quite frankly the vast majority of us, then there will be snide asides about how she is seeking power because she couldn’t land the man she really wanted.
I am not suggesting this is and always will be the fate of women who wish to challenge the various power structures. It is however, the fate of women who wish to challenge power structures in societies where fear of women is a an overt or underlying cultural norm .
We’ve come a long way baby, but the road ahead is long. And it doesn’t matter if we are straight, gay, transgendered, or women of color. I am not suggesting those qualities don’t matter, they do. But they often don’t matter to men who fear us. And working class women who try to articulate their struggles and challenge class barriers will be facing fears about revolutionary angst. We simply cannot have the servants running the show can we? At least HRC is from the respectable upper classes.
And there are plenty of valid reasons why many of us oppose her candidacy. There are plenty of valid reasons to oppose any woman’s candidacy. Unfortunately, we rarely hear them in popular discussions because in the end what some, not all men want, is a combination porn star/mommy to make them feel good about themselves and when women fail to carry out this critical role, they are attacked and rejected as deficient no matter what office they run for or what position they seek.