The course of sexual activity runs through 4 general stages in both men and women: excitement, plateau, orgasmic, and finally resolution, or returning to an unstimulated state.

There are no sharply defined boundaries between these phases, so they are used only for reference and convenience. Below is a detailed guide to the various sexual changes found in women throughout all 4 of these stages, and you might notice it is a bit lengthy.

This is because you have to understand that in detail, a description of all the sexual changes that occur in a woman are quite complex.

Excitement (Oh yeah!)

The first sign of sexual response in women may seem a bit different from the first obvious signs of arousal in men (penis erection). The walls of the vagina are moistened with a lubricating fluid.

This lubrication appears quite rapidly, within ten to thirty seconds from the onset of sexual stimulation. This lubrication appears in the same manner, whether the source of the sexual stimulation is directly on the genitals, or on the breasts, or even an erotic train of thought.

The source of this lubrication has long been argued; but now most experts believe it is caused by a sweating reaction of the walls of the vagina; beads of moisture form and then coalesce, all this despite the fact that there are no sweat glands in the vagina.

To most people, the lubrication of the female vagina and the erection of the penis may seem like completely different reactions, however they share a common cause.

In the genitals of both men and women, during sexual arousal more blood enters the surrounding tissues than can exit, producing vasocongestion. Since both the walls of the vagina and the surrounding blood vessels are semipermeable membranes, meaning they hold back fluids on some occasions and let them flow through on others, the lubricating action of the vagina is thought to be a result of the vasocongestion producing moisture on the vaginal walls.

This can be thought of in much the same way that a damp sponge won’t drip unless it is squeezed; when the vaginal walls are compressed through vasocongestion the excess fluid is forced out of the tissue to become the lubricating fluid.

This appearance of vaginal lubrication very early in the sexual response cycle deserves some attention, because many men may believe that this signals the woman’s complete readiness for sexual intercourse.

This is true in a sense, because entry prior to this lubrication can be uncomfortable for the woman, or even painful, however this reaction should be seen as just the beginning of the female arousal.

Many more changes are necessary throughout the course of a woman’s arousal before she will be “erotically prepared” to reach orgasm.

Important changes will follow, for example, in the clitoris. This tiny organ is located under a hood of flesh, just above the entrance to the vagina.

Like the penis, it is a shaft with a bulb at the tip, although much of it is usually hidden under the hood and it is much smaller than the penis. The size of this organ can vary greatly amongst different women, however just as in men, the size and shape of this organ do not correspond with different levels of responsiveness or ability to achieve orgasm.

The clitoris is packed with many sensitive nerve endings, and the stimulation of this organ contributes greatly to the heightening of the woman’s sexual response and feelings of pleasure during sexual encounters.

In fact, it is believed by most sexual experts that the sole purpose of the female clitoris is for sensing pleasure during sexual encounters. Direct contact with the clitoris, however, is not necessary in order to stimulate it; the hood of flesh that covers it is attached to the lips of the vagina, and during normal thrusting of the penis into the vagina during intercourse the friction created does well to stimulate the clitoris.

In addition to the various types of physical stimuli, the clitoris is responsive to purely psychological stimuli as well, such as erotic trains of thought. This is similar to the responsiveness of the male penis.

The first of these changes during sexual relations is the swelling of the clitoral glans or tip. In some women the glans may actually double in size, while in others the change may be barely noticeable. The swelling reaction is no doubt very similar to the swelling reaction of the male penis, where blood vessels become engorged with blood and cause the surrounding tissue to swell.

As with the penis, the swelling of the glans also corresponds with the swelling of the clitoral shaft, although this is much less pronounced than the swelling present in the glans.

The time at which these changes occur depends on the nature of the stimulation in which the woman is responding to.

If her mons veneris- the area surrounding the clitoris- is being stimulated directly, the engorgement of the clitoris may appear quite rapidly, however if her breasts are being stimulated or if the stimulation is psychological, then the engorgement may take somewhat longer.

In addition to changes present in the woman’s sexual organs, a series of changes is also present in her breasts. The first of these changes is an erection of the nipples, which is caused by a contraction of the muscle fibers surrounding them.

Often one nipple becomes erect before the other, either immediately after one or after a delay of considerable time, a phenomenon which is also present in some men.

During erection, the nipples increase in both length and diameter as a result of blood vessel engorgement, which is very similar to the process that causes the sex organs of the penis and the clitoris to swell.

The pattern of veins ordinarily visible on the skin surface on the breasts may become much more pronounced, and some previously invisible veins may become visible during this engorgement process.

The breasts themselves also increase in size late in the excitement phase. This is a sign of heightened sexual tension that precedes the boundless transition into the next phase of excitement.

This swelling of the breasts is most notable in women who have not breast-fed babies. Late in the excitement phase, the areolas- the rings of darker skin surrounding the nipples- become engorged and swell.

The outer lips of the vagina respond in several ways during the excitement phase. In a normal, unexcited state, they normally meet in the midline of the vagina, covering the inner lips and other organs and features within.

During excitation they open up somewhat, and may point towards the clitoris. In women who have not had babies, the lips tend to flatten out and press against the surrounding tissue.

In women who have given birth several times, and especially those who have developed vericose veins in their outer lips, they become noticeably distended and engorged with blood instead of flattening. In extreme cases the lips may increase in size to two or three times their normal, unexcited size, so that they resemble a curtain of flesh surrounding the opening to the vagina, however they still tend to point outward and upward as tension increases as to not interfere with the entry of the penis.

These changes, as with those mentioned earlier, tend to occur late in the excitement phase.

The inner lips also swell at about the same time as the outer lips, and it may be this swelling that causes the outer lips to open out away from the vagina. The vagina also responds.

It can be thought of as a cylinder or “barrel” which remains in a collapsed state in a normal, unexcited state. The outer third of the vagina reacts in a completely separate manner than the inner two-thirds during successive sexual excitement.

The inner two-thirds expand and then relax again. The cervix and uterus are pulled up and back at about this time, producing an expansion of the vaginal walls surrounding the cervix.

The net result of these changes and others is a dramatic “ballooning” of the inner two-thirds of the vaginal barrel. The diameter of the inner part of the vagina may extend to three times that of an unstimulated organ, and the length may be increased by a full inch or more.

The expansion and engorgement of the inner and outer lips may also contribute to this lengthening. The “rugae” or wrinkles in the vaginal walls are also smoothed out as the vessels in them become engorged with blood. At this time they also change in color from red to dark red or purple.

There are also other changes that appear in both men and women throughout the entire body during the excitement phase. Voluntary muscles tense and relax.

Pulse rate speeds up, and blood pressure rises. A remarkable feature that is less common in men but seen at sometime during the excitement phase of 75% of all women is the sexual flush of the skin.

It usually appears on the upper abdomen, and then eventually spreads to the entire body in some cases.

This doesn’t occur in all women, and sometimes its appearance may come earlier or later but is found most often late in the response cycle, when a woman is nearing the climax of orgasm.

Plateau (We’re getting there!)

Experts divide the sexual response of men and women into 4 phases only for convenience and reference, because there are no sharp boundaries between them. This is especially true of the vague boundary between the excitement and plateau.

In both men and women, the rate of breathing increases during the plateau phase, and there is a further increase in blood pressure and pulse rate.

The sex flush may appear now, if it hadn’t earlier, or if it had it will now appear darker in color and more widespread over the body.

The tension of voluntary and involuntary muscles is heightened, and there may be almost spastic contractions in several muscle groups in the face, hands, ribs, back, and abdomen. The sphincter muscle in the anus may tighten up, and some women tighten it intentionally to further heighten tension.

In the female breasts, further darkening and swelling of the nipples and areolas (the darker area of skin surrounding the nipple) may occur.

The swelling of the areolas may initially mask the erection of the nipples, causing them to appear shorter, however further swelling of the areolas and erection of the nipples may occur.

The most dramatic change in women during the plateau phase is the appearance of the “orgasmic platform.” This is the engorgement and swelling of the tissues surrounding the outer third of the vaginal barrel.

As a result of this swelling, the diameter of the outer third is reduced by as much as 50%. Thus, during intercourse, at this time the vagina actually grips the penis, and the erotic stimulation of the man increases greatly.

The appearance of this “orgasmic platform” however, does not necessarily mean a woman is ready for orgasm.

Further changes occur in the internal sexual organs of the female. The uterus becomes elevated and enlarged, as much as twice its normal size, and the inner vagina balloons even more than before.

The clitoris, at this point, may become elevated, rising from its normal position over the pubic bone, becoming retracted behind the clitoral hood.

During this elevation, it is drawn away from the vaginal entrance, however it remains extremely sensitive to stimulation, either directly or indirectly through the thrusting of the penis around the pubic bone into the vagina.

Aside from these changes, color changes, if not present before, may become more pronounced at this point as the pinkish tissue of all the visible organs may become darker, especially is stimulation is prolonged.

As mentioned earlier, in both men and women all of these changes seem to stem from two causes: the engorgement of blood vessels and increases in muscle tension.

In both genders it seems logical that readiness for orgasm is reached after these tensions reach an adequate peak.

Orgasm (Ahhh!)

The major feature of the female orgasm is the euphoric explosion of pleasure, accompanied by a series of rhythmic contractions of the female sexual organs.

Contractions of the anal sphincter muscle and other surrounding tissues may also occur. These contractions seem to start in the uterus and progress down through the cervix, vagina, clitoris, and vaginal lips.

The first few contractions occur at 4/5 second intervals, and tend to taper off and become longer as the orgasm diminishes. A mild orgasm might only have three to five contractions, while an intense one may have twelve or more.

In addition to initial effects of the orgasm, changes occur in the rest of the body. Pulse rate, blood pressure, and breathing rate reach a peak.

The sex flush will be most pronounced. Muscles throughout the rest of the body may also undergo various changes.

These changes vary greatly from one woman to the next, however some common orgasmic reactions include screaming, grunting, moaning, fist clenching, thighs clenching the male body, and there are many more.

Resolution (Ahh…)

One major function of the orgasm becomes apparent soon after it ends. It releases all the stored sexual and muscular tensions and initiates the release of blood from engorged organs.

The first noticeable change in women is the areolas surrounding the nipples losing their erection. This reaction gives an observer the impression that the nipples are experiencing a further erection, while in fact the tissues around theme are only subsiding away from them. This feature is a sign that the woman has in fact reached orgasm.

Breathing rate, pulse, and blood pressure return to normal levels. Women don’t have the refractory period that men experience, and if they are further stimulated shortly after orgasm, they may experience further excitement and may even have additional orgasms.

The sex flush also disappears rapidly, and accompanying this rapid disappearance is the forming of a filmy sheen of perspiration on the entire bodies of many women. This varies greatly. This perspiration is completely unrelated to the muscular action and orgasm intensity.

Within a few seconds after the orgasm has ended, several other changes occur. The clitoris returns quickly to the unstimulated position, however up to a half an hour or more may elapse before it shrinks to its unstimulated size.

Over the course of about an hour after the woman has experienced the orgasm, all her sexual organs and the rest of her body eventually returns to a sexually unstimulated state.

None of the details of sexual arousal above may accurately describe any one woman, everyone is different in their own manner of response.

This is just a general guide of what often or usually takes place, often men and women won’t show all the features listed, and could even show signs not even mentioned.

Another important thing to note is the fact that these phases occur almost exactly the same no matter what the source of the stimulation is, whether it is from masturbation or intercourse or something… else.…

There are some big cons of being — or, more accurately, being seen as, being called — a “sex-positive” feminist. In fact, at this point, I’m sure it’s nothing BUT cons. For everyone.

I’ve been thinking about this a lot over the last year, and it’s seemed high time to discuss it outright, even knowing that it’s going to be rambling, murky and unclear, primarily because the entire issue itself is, in so many ways, not even real.

I think what spurred me on to the thoughts I’ve been having over the last few months was a discussion over at the All Girl Army a while back on pornography.

A few of the girls who came in pro-porn were stating that they felt that they were far LESS heard than those who were anti-porn (and a couple were talking right over the anti-porn girls, and in a thread that was all about personal opinion, were picking apart the personal narratives and opinions of those other young women, rather than merely sharing their own), something I had to vehemently disagree with when we’re talking about feminist women who are anti-porn.

Even though, I assure you, that several years back, I might have said exactly what they were saying about my visibility as someone who wasn’t pro-porn, but wasn’t anti-either. Ah, hindsight.

Certainly, the anti-porn perspective is well-heard when it’s coming from a vantage point of setting up pornography as a barrier to purity, innocence, femininity, modesty and proper morality. But when the discussion is about porn as a barrier to equality, to real female sexual ownership, respect and autonomy; when the discussion is about body image issues or young partners clearly parroting porn in their in-person dynamics….?

Eh, not so much. And for the youngest women, it’s become even tougher to find avenues in which voice those opinions.

Before I go anywhere else with this, for the purposes of this discussion and understanding my stance on pornography when it’s pertinent, when I say “pornography,” in these contexts, I am not talking about any and all material which may incite sexual arousal or desire.

I’m talking expressly about material made for profit and en masse distribution, and which is most often made solely or primarily for men, to benefit and profit men, by men. In the same vein, I DO and have used and self-assigned the term sex-positive to the sort of sex education I provide, and did and do to the erotica and visual art I have produced: I’m not talking about “sex-positive” in other contexts here.

I simply, to my knowledge, have never identified my feminism this way. I did Google myself on the topic, to double-check, and could not find one instance where I self-identified this way, but still. Lastly, I will not be referencing the feminist “sex wars” in any of this, because as most of us know, that has little to do with anything real, unless we’re talking about NOW and lesbians locked outside in the 70’s, and I’m not. Besides, this is the 21st century: let’s get over it, already, eh? Most of us weren’t even there.

And I found myself having to make clear that I thought we needed to make extra room, extend extra effort per visibility, to feminists who were anti-porn, even though — and I said as much — that is not a category I would have placed myself in at all in my life, and it’s not really even one I place myself in now, for various reasons, despite having many very strenuous objections to much of pornography from a feminist viewpoint, as well as from a standpoint of what I feel is optimal for a cultural sexual well-being.

My points weren’t about what I needed, but about personally seeing a pretty obvious inequality in who got to speak and be heard on the issue, and in having a vested interest in allowing for as many perspectives as possible, especially when I felt I could say that I knew an awful lot more arenas in which one could speak in favor or pornography and far less to speak in protest, especially as feminist women, or when the protest was on grounds other than a patriarchal morality.

And all THAT brought up the age-old label of “sex-positive” feminists, which necessarily implies there is an inverse: the “sex-negative” feminist.

Here’s the problem.

There is no such person.

The “sex-negative” or “anti-sex” feminist is a big, stinky red herring.

I feel very confident saying no such woman exists to my knowledge: she is a strawfeminist. And in many ways, constructing a “sex-positive” sect of feminism — intended or no, though many times I think it is intended — can serve the same end as anti-choicers identifying instead as “pro-life,” does: it paints those who are not clinging to that branch as something they are not, and it paints those others exactly how one wants them to be seen, quite manipulatively.

By all means, there are feminists — of any sex or gender — who critique or protest various kinds of sex, or given approaches to/frameworks of sex and sexuality. There are feminists who oppose pornography and/or sex trafficking and sex work, some or all.

There are feminists who oppose any type of subordination — even willing subordination — in partnered sex. There are feminists who have a big problem with heterosexual intercourse, or with certain approaches to it; feminists who have a big problem with a handful of different sexual activities, or, more accurately, certain approaches to or dynamics which can and often are brought to those activities. There are lesbian separatist feminists; there are celibate feminists.

There are feminists who have a problem with consent — as in, “I say yes to” or “I don’t decline,” — as a final word on anything, or as a barrier to any sort of examination or question of a given sexuality, sexual dynamic or sexual activity.

There are feminists who have a big problem with bringing heterosexual roles or cultural dynamics to non-heterosexual sex and partnerships; there are feminists who are anti-heirarchy in sexual relationships and sexuality.

And of any of those feminists, there are those who apply these ideas and ideals only to themselves, those who put them out there for question and examination to others, those who suggest feminism would be best served by everyone sharing them; there are those for whom any of these issues are part of their feminism, there are those for whom they consider any of these issues separate from their feminism, or feminism-at-large.

But I’ve been in all this long enough now, since college at a minimum (I read feminist works before then, engaged in some feminist action before then, but I’d say I didn’t really start deeply digging in until around ‘89), to say that to date, I have never met a single “anti-sex” feminist, a feminist who says she is against all of sex and sexuality, on any terms, against all sexual partnership, by any definition, and that human sexuality, in the whole of its sphere, is a barrier to women’s equality and quality of life. I do not know of any group calling themselves “Feminists Against Sex.”

I have never seen or met a feminist who is going to protests with big signs that read “ALL SEXUALITY, OF ANY KIND, IS OPPRESSIVE TO ALL WOMEN.”

Ever. Never. And until I see just one holding such a sign, or making such a statement and identifying herself as feminist, I have absolutely no reason to believe that this dichotomy/binary set up by the term “sex-positive feminist” is false.

So, sure, maybe I just haven’t met these women because there are only so many people out and about in the world we can encounter, read and see, and I’m only one person. But I think the real reason I haven’t met these women is that these women do not exist.

So, why do we hear so much about them? Why is there this whole class of feminists identified as a pro to a nonexistent anti?

More to the point, why, when I haven’t ever really labeled myself this way, do women like myself continue to be defined by others AS “sex-positive” feminists if “anti-sex” or “sex-negative” feminists aren’t real?

The most obvious answer is, of course, that some people do earnestly believe they’re real, and if we’re not them, we must be their opposite.

Equally obvious is the fact that I am a woman who talks about sex a lot, works with sexuality as a theme a lot for her work, who artistically works with the nude and sexuality by preference, and whose feminist work often centers around sexuality and reproductive rights issues, a la, things about sex (I also work a lot with the female body, which is, of course, presumed to always be about sex).

With women like myself who work in sexuality and are also feminist, it may be presumed that the only classification for me as a feminist is as a sex-positive feminist. And I’ve had that presumption made of me by people all over the map, from “other” sex-positive feminists to radical feminists, from the middle of the road, and from both edges of it; by men, by women, by groups, by individuals.

I’ve been all but collared with it.

There are tougher answers though, too, answers that I want to discuss, especially for younger women, because I feel that that “sex-positive feminist” label has really held me down in terms of the effectiveness of my feminism and my feminist work.

It’s a label I don’t want anyone to walk into blithely or lightly — and admittedly, I have often been very blithe about labels people affix to me, even when they aren’t those I affix to myself or agree with — and, like anything else, which I’d encourage folks to give some deep thought to.

For instance, you put “sex-positive” in front of the word feminist, and I think you cut the impact of “feminist” at least in half, on either “side” of the false equation.

To plenty of men, that sex-positive in front of feminist says that either I am the sort of feminist they just don’t have to worry about, because I pose no real threat to them — since I don’t appear to want to take away or limit access to sex — or worse still, in some cases, it says additionally that they will get the heart of what they really want from me — sex — regardless, so who freaking cares if I’m feminist, right?

So, you nod and smile when I talk women’s equality and it’s all cool: you’re still getting laid, Joe. (I am, for the record, not just pulling this out of my ass: in discussing this over the years, even just personally, I have had plenty of male friends or once-lovers confess that yes, this is exactly how they viewed my feminism at one time. I have also, like anyone else, read enough ‘net commentary on all of this by men to see this exact reaction and thought process in action.)

When you create this binary, you also force women, in some respect, to have to accept, embrace or support things like pornography, BDSM or sex trafficking who may not — or may not unilaterally — if they are labeled or seen as supportive of sexuality. In other words, were I to say I were “sex-positive,” affixed to that would be that I support or accept all pornography, whether I do or do not, in whole or in part, and whether or not I feel those things or some aspects of them are, in fact, profoundly sex-negative, or stand in the way of a healthy, autonomous sexuality for women.

The sex-positive feminist label often means that we have little to no choice per our bedfellows: we are often forced into bed with those who support exactly that — forcing women into bed — and who stand counter to not only many feminist aims as a whole, but even what are often said to be “sex-postive” aims. And I resent and have always resented having this label put on me strongly for that reason: I’ve had radical feminist women put it on me to make me appear I’m in bed with those I’m not, I’ve had women who see themselves as counter to radfems do same, and no matter who does it, it freaking stinks.

You put “sex-positive” in front of feminist and to a lot of men and women, it sends a message that while they may need to worry about me calling them out in other arenas, they don’t have to worry about me calling them out or questioning them in the arena of sexuality, no matter what kind of sex they’re having, how they enact it, or what questions I may want to ask just to find out what the answers are for myself.

When you put it on yourself, in many ways it also sends a clear — and often known — message that says “You may not question me, my actions or my theories on anything sexual, no matter what I do or say.”

Now, part of this, I get. Sex and sexuality IS sacred and IS personal.

Obviously, it’s more or less sacred, and sacred in different ways, for different people, but it is sacred, in a myriad of respects.

No matter what type of sex it is we enjoy at a given time, no matter what our sexual identity, for most of us both are incredibly personal, very individual, and however little or however much or sexuality is or is not defined for us, influenced by outside influences, it often feels extraordinarily authentic, plenty of it IT hard-wired and we want — and deserve — real ownership of it.

For many of us, sex and our sexuality is solace, it is a way we find — or at the very least, seek — communion with ourselves and others, it is self-expression, it is process, it is growth and evolution, and the sex we’re having today may well not be the sex we want to have a decade from now, but it remains the sex we are having, and which feels right to us, right now.

As women, we obviously feel an even greater to cling hard and fast to our sexuality, because in so many ways, so many people, of all kinds, either refuse our ownership or threaten the little we have.

Critique of our sexuality — of any core part of ourselves — is also very hard to hear, and sound critique of sexuality and its aspects is incredibly hard to give in the first place, because our first instinct is almost always to see it first and foremost through our own lens.

* * *
I’m going to go ahead and make an admission I generally reserve for private, just because I earnestly feel like such a complete asshole for thinking things like this, even when I was a lot younger and more green.

Back in high school and college, when I first started picking up, or being given for study, certain radical feminist texts, I very ashamedly admit that I often earnestly thought, and sometimes even said aloud, “Christ, these women just need to get laid.”

(Mind, I did NOT mean “get fucked,” nor did I mean “get a penis put in their vaginas because of the mystical, life-changing powers of the penis.” I also did not mean by that that somehow having decent sex — with anyone at all of any hue or sex — would solve all the problems of women. I can’t excuse my thoughts like this much, because I want to be accountable for them, but in some respects they at least weren’t as completely stupid as they could have been.

Just mostly stupid, especially since my reaction, in hindsight, was a very clear knee-jerk to having things questioned that I just wanted to enjoy, without the burden of question or critique: I didn’t WANT to think about it, dammit, and screw them for making me.)

Over the years, the more I read, and the more expansive a context I had to put it in, that sentiment began to sound as totally moronic and shitty as it was, and I began to feel as much of an idiot on that matter as I had been acting. But over the years, too, some of the underlying truths that lay beneath the thick haze of my stupidity and defensiveness became clear.

To whit: women DO need the agency to have sex (or physical and emotional intimacy combined, however you’d like to put it or whatever you’d like to have) on our terms, and by our definition, that is pleasurable, that is real communion, that honors our bodies and selves.

Women DO need real sexual autonomy and ownership of our unique and diverse bodies and our unique and diverse sexualities.

Women DO need a cultural sexuality that includes all of us, truly allows for all of us, and which holds all of us us in equal regard.

Women DO need to be able to define sex on our own terms, whatever they may be, and have equal allowance made for us to even be able to discover what our authentic sexualities and terms even are — to truly author our own sexuality — free of pressures to make our sexuality fit, support or enable a cultural model of sexuality which men created, not women, and which men created without much, if any, accord for women.

Hell, we didn’t even get to be the ones who named our own parts.

Now. Having all of that certainly won’t ever magically make all of the oppressions women face vanish, but NOT having all of that — and for many women globally, ANY of that — is very much potent fuel, with many other assorted additions, in the gas tank that drives our oppression.

So, it’s not that radfems need to get laid, or that women unhappy with their position in society just need a good schtup. It’s that women as a class and as individuals, overwhelmingly, are oppressed sexually in numerous ways and that our sexual oppression is yet one more rock on the giant pile of many we’ve been stoned with that keep us down, AND hyperfocus on the sexual, or sex-as-entry to being able to bring up feminism at all is part of that.

…and radical feminists — those most often arbitrarily labeled as against sex and sexuality — KNOW this. And THIS is what the hell most (we can’t say all, we can’t ever, because feminists, like anyone else, aren’t immune from being assholes, idiots or crackpots) are going for when they are critiquing or protesting aspects of sex and sexuality.

THIS is what gets many labeled as anti-sex or “sex-negative.”

(There’s a whole separate conversation, by the by, to be had about how I feel the whole meaning and intent of the phrase “sex-positive” when applied to anything has changed. I’d love to put it here, but this puppy is lengthy enough as it is.

There’s also a whole separate conversation to be had about how the converse of “sex-positive” is “manhating,” and the bullshit that says about both groups, including, m’dears, that sex-positive feminists must necessarily be putting out for men and loving-to-bits the current cultural construct of male sexuality.)

As I mentioned earlier, it isn’t just the sex-positive feminists who become diminished, whose ideas and words are given less credence by that label.

By the inference that there are anti-sex feminists, those feminists who are not “sex-positive” are also diminished because it is generally seen as a given not only THAT they exist, and that they are those women who do not ID as sex-positive, but that they aren’t “real” women, aren’t whole people, aren’t sane, sound people because they are a people presumed or assigned to be either without a sexuality or in denial of one.

Ironically, potentially without even realizing it, we wind up with people marginalizing those women based on their “anti-sex” stances-that-aren’t using some of the landmarks of those same women without even acknowledging them — we have, for instance, the second wave to thank for the construction of language and premises which gave us “no means no” and the differentiation between consent and nonconsent, between consensual sex and sexual abuse. And yet.

In case it’s somehow escaped anyone’s attention over the years, I am a rabid fan of the comma, especially when it comes to describing myself. I am always far more inclined to create a list of the things I am and the influences I have: to join them in a sentence, but to keep them separated by commas, rather than compounding them. I am a buddhist, an earth-lover, an anti-racist, a person without economic privilege, a socialist, a white woman from immigrant families, pro-choice, an abuse survivor, a sex worker of sorts, nonviolent, antiwar, vegan, queer, anti-marriage… I am any great number of things, but I am not one of those things + feminist.

Thus, when I identify as feminist, it is only as that: feminist. If someone needs me to explain that further, I’m glad to, but as far as I’m concerned, it really says all that needs saying without further qualification: I have a vested and active interest in the emancipation, equality and connectivity of women. (Plus, when you have the kind of verbal and textual diarrhea which I do, if someone isn’t getting your deal, one extra word or label isn’t going to somehow make it all suddenly clear.) But I have long been titles by others as a “sex-positive” feminist: by some in adoration, by some in scorn, and by some, I suspect, just because it seems like the thing to say.

When that happens, I, as a feminist, am made to be taken less seriously, given less weight, because if I like sex or say I do (whatever any given person presumes “sex” to mean or encompass) I can easily be seen as a sexual object, and because IF I like or say I do sex, I must not be very feminist (and of course, it’s presumed, implied or simply affixed that IF I like sex, if I work in and affirm sexuality, I must therefore be in no way critical of any kind of sexuality or sex, and must be okay with the kind of sex and sexuality the prevailing hegemony practices, enables or cheerleads, blah blah blah), and whatever my feminism is, it’s nothing for anyone to trouble themselves with in terms of having any real power, because if I can be made to be a sexual object or okay the sexual objectification of women, if I will have sex and not ever question the sex I or anyone else is having, then I still serve a lot of the primary interests of the status quo.

Those “anti-sex” feminists, those women who hate sex on all terms who we’re led to believe are out and about and ready to take all our fun away have THEIR power undermined because if they critique sex, or don’t have a certain kind of sex, it surely must because because no one wants to have it WITH them, because they’re hairy or fat or ugly or old or visibly disabled or any of the things that don’t fit beauty ideals.

If they are not “sex-positive,” or talking about how great sex is all the damn time, they must also in some way be maladjusted, and thus, their credibility and power is sapped, too.

The big duh of course, which should be obvious, is that either way you flip that coin, we’re all being discounted on the basis of sex and sexuality, and how others interpret us through than lens, no matter what we call ourselves.

Which I shouldn’t need to mention, but will all the same, is quite precisely what feminism, from it’s very beginnings, has protested.

What really grates my soy cheese about any of this is how stupid the whole freaking lot of us can be — yeah, me, you, everyone else — not to realize that these divisions that aren’t even real are used in a very real way expressly and intentionally to keep us divided, to keep us from achieving very real, united aims, and so many of us, on all “sides,” enable them, knowingly and unknowingly, which ultimately stymies any of us reaching our aims when it comes to feminism.

They’re used to blind us to far more real divisions: divisions of race, of class, of geography, for instance, and we too often buy right into them (in part, perhaps, because — especially if we’re women of any privilege, because we just don’t want to deal with those other divisions).

So many of us have at one time, or do now, somehow allow ourselves to continue to play this high school game of sluts and prudes — and let others reduce us to that, and they do: to be part of women hating all over other women — and without feeling like dolts about it, to go to public No, YO mama!s to one another — because of sex: doing EXACTLY what we’ve been reared to do to each other by a culture of men to keep us divided instead of united.

In saying that, I am not referring to compassionate critique on anyone’s part, of anyone’s view. I’m talking about the sort of name-calling and bitch-slapping that can and does happen from any side of this manufactured and imaginary fence, that happens on the internet like crazy (mostly due, no doubt, to the crap communication dynamic the ‘net can create, especially when people don’t use real names and feel able to say things they’d never say to someone’s face, or never say when they knew it’d follow their resume), and again, which happens from no one party, but really unilaterally.

And I just, for the life of me, can’t figure out how so many of us smart women can be so bloody stupid, and how any of us can call ourselves feminist if we’re willing to be divided by something as small and truly unthreatening as critique or question of our sexuality coming from a good place.

I think about the work I do, and I think of how much divisions like this have sometimes stood in the way of my counseling rape and abuse survivors and helping to get them to better, safer places, because I’m seen as this kind of feminist or that, so I do or do not have this credibility or that.

Or stood in the way of educating more women about their own sexual anatomy and self-pleasure, or about creating a sexual and interpersonal dynamic in their relationships that is right for them.

Or of connecting women who I KNOW could really benefit one another and benefit feminism as a whole, but who can’t see past these arbitrary and useless divisions to find where they CAN connect.

After saying all of this, it may sound silly to say that even if there were/are, these anti-sex feminists, I’m not sure it would matter very much. Because we’re not — or shouldn’t be — at war with one another, regardless.

We should be able, however difficult it is, however much we screw it up time after time, to acknowledge whatever differences we have and still very easily find common ground that if we are all feminist we DO all stand upon, no matter how different some of our views, no matter how different our ideas may be of the best way to get there.

* * *

This isn’t easy terrain for me to navigate, not the least of which because working in sexuality and sex education is what I do, and by virtue of that, much of my efforts when it come to feminism ARE in that arena. Not because I feel it is THE area, nor the most important or critical, nor THE equality that will fix issues of equality for everyone (especially when you bear in mind or agree that sex is the first differential, it’s hardly the only one, especially for those whose oppressions are exponentially compounded by class, by race, by nationality, by ability, etc.).

Rather, a lot of my feminist activism — not all, but a majority — is in this arena because this is where I have worked for many years, where I continue to work, and it is an arena in which I have discovered I can work effectively with the skills and gifts I have and serve very real needs in an arena which is important to most, including myself, especially as a survivor of sexual violence and abuse.

So, I’m well aware that a lot of the time, that is going to give the impression that my feminism is only about sexuality, merely because there are only so many hours in the day for me to work, so much people like to hear me talk, and because I can only diversify my efforts so much and be as effective as I’d like. But as I’ve explained, I’m also unwilling to let a lot of people off that easy: I know too well, that by so many different types of people, my feminism has been said to be about nothing but sex merely to dismiss and discredit me as a feminist.

Too, a lot of my energy over the last few years has been invested, per my feminism, on really working on connectivity and bridging divides.

Setting up the AGA was part of that, as has been trying very hard to keep cultivating the interpersonal connections I have with feminist women older than myself.

Of course, it’s not easy, but it’s so painfully obvious that so much of why is just that women …

People continue to lump sexual, romantic, and even platonic feelings together under “sexual” orientation, when the reality is that each of the three is an independent variable. Most males, in particular, have no problem separating sex from romance. For example, when a straight male says, “I’m not gay. I just like male oral sex,” what he means is that he is heteroromantic (straight in the romantic sense). In short, romantic orientation is what people usually mean by “sexual” orientation.

I believe that about 70% of the male population is biSEXUAL, heteroromantic, and homoplatonic (sharing homosocial bonds with guys, as straight males love to do). It is this innate biSEXuality in them that causes straight-identified males to fear anything gay. Furthermore, about 13.5% of the population is either exclusively or overwhelmingly homoromantic (gay in the romantic sense).

The remainder may be biromantic AND bisexual.

I believe that most males bring their romantic feelings for females when they interact sexually with them and bring their platonic feelings for males when they have sex with males.

The sex transforms these feelings (whether romantic or platonic) into stronger bonds between males and their sexual partners (whether males or females). This, in turn, has evolutionary benefits.

Studies clearly are needed on this, but they won’t be made until researchers start dissecting sexual, romantic, and platonic orientation as three independent variables.

Reading through the many advice columns on the Internet, I am disappointed that the so-called “experts” continue to talk about “heterosexuals,” “bisexuals,” and “homosexuals” when referring to the romantic feelings of these populations, and then dismiss the sexual feelings of their male readers as meaningless (or as “not meaning you’re gay or bi”) simply because it is sex, not romance, that the readers confess to being curious about.

A typical reader comment would go something like, “I’m a straight guy not interested in other guys. But I like sucking a man’s penis.

Am I gay?” The “expert” would then say something like, “Just because you enjoy gay sexual activity doesn’t mean you’re gay, or even bi. It is your emotional feelings that determine your sexual orientation. If you only like girls, then you’re probably heterosexual.”

The problem with this exchange (so typical on the Internet and even scholarly journals) is that the terms remain vague. Things such as “like girls” would presumably mean in a romantic sense. But this is not made clear, and the purely sexual feelings/activities are dismissed as “not the real thing.” Unfortunately, this approach belittles sex and raises romance as the REAL determinant of “sexual” orientation.

For males, however, sex ALONE is just as important as romance, and terms are simply lacking to allow them to make sense (to tear apart, if you will) these different elements of their lives, much less to name and even identify along different tiers of “orientation”-in this case sexual vs. romantic. vs. platonic orientation.

The label bisexual is rejected by straight-identified people-and males, in particular-because they think that it means rejecting the opposite sex romantically. But one can be straight in the romantic sense AND bisexual in the purely sexual sense (at least males can, who easily divorce sex from romance).

In other words, people can identify in more than one way if presented with new analytical concepts and mutitiered orientation scales, such as the three-circle graph that reconceptualizes the Kinsey scale.

America was way ahead in the 19th century, when males had the freedom (and were even encouraged) to form really intense friendships with other males.

These friendships were called romantic-friendships because they involved males holding hands, kissing on the lips, cuddling together, and talking about intimate matters. (Females practiced these romantic-friendships as well, with other females.) Then, “homosexuality” was discovered in the late-19th century-just as industrial capitalism really took off.

Suddenly, males were rebuked as “homosexuals” for being physically tender with other males and were encouraged to be competitive and to distrust one another (this being needed in the more fiercely capitalistic world that was emerging). The ridiculousness of this is that today, most males are thought to be biologically programmed to be macho, to distrust one another, and to be “straight.” But looking at the social order of 19th century America (and Europe), one sees that romantic-friendships were quite natural.

Sure, they lacked the sexual element, but everything else (from holding hands to sleeping together) was there.

I believe that America (and western Europe) can move back to this model, but this will require a radical shift in group consciousness.

For starters, it will mean questioning the dominant paradigm of “sexual” orientation, of people being either “straight” or “gay,” of sex and romance/friendship being the same thing (instead of independent variables that often come together), of males being biologically programmed to distrust one another and be “straight” (instead of socially conditioned for that), and so on.

The conservatives are right! Labels do matter, and how one identifies early in life (as far as “sexual” orientation) influences how one sees oneself in adulthood (as straight, gay, bi, etc.).

This self-image, in turn, influences what one allows oneself to fantasize about, what one allows oneself to do (and not do), one’s choice of friends, etc. Let’s hope that researchers, activists, and others start providing people with more options (through research and activism) as far as “sexual” orientation and how people are allowed and even encouraged to identify.…

Probably no word appears more often in the questions that come to this website than the word ‘normal.’ Many males are trying to determine if what they ‘do’ or ‘have’ is normal, as it relates to sexual issues (e.g., size of their penis, frequency of masturbation, sexual preference, etc.)

How does one determine what is normal? Many believe there is some clearly agreed upon standard established by someone or some group that can provide answers to such questions. Unfortunately, for many male sexual questions that are frequently raised, no such standards exist. Even scientific studies, such as those done by Alfred Kinsey many years ago in the 1950s (and other scientists more recently) do not provide answers as to what is ‘normal’ or ‘abnormal’.

At best, they can provide insight into the sexual practices of ‘most men’ or ‘most women.’ So, for example, scientific studies show that most men masturbate. Does this mean that those who do not are abnormal? Of course not! Such studies can provide important insights, but they do not tell us what is ‘normal.’ They are pointers to what seem to be the practices of men and women on sexual matters. It is not their task to determine what is normal or not.

American society and most other societies have determined that certain sexual practices are not acceptable, and they have outlawed them.

For example, prostitution, public nudity, rape, sexual abuse of minors, etc.,  have had related legislation enforced to protect innocent individuals from sexual trauma. Lawmakers have determined that such practices are not normal and not good for a society at large. And those who violate these laws can be punished. But on what basis and what foundation does society make such a judgment? When we feel we can see enough to determine what is normal or not, we are moving onto a different plane of thinking.

We are essentially asking questions that relate to religion and ethics. As far as many questions raised on this site are concerned, religion and ethics have nothing to say; but on some them have clearly defined views.

For example, there are no clear guidelines to determine if anal intercourse is normal or not. Here it is a matter of what the individuals directly involved find acceptable. Some religious groups, on the other hand, have judged that masturbation and homosexual practices are sinful (and abnormal).

When we ask questions about what is normal or abnormal in sexual practice, we are moving into consideration of the ethical standards that guide our lives. Some find these standards in religious faith, others in humanism. However, most people tend to want to meet the unwritten requirements or standards in what is called ‘popular culture beliefs’.

These beliefs are the values, morals, ethics, and benchmarks passed on to us by the culture in which we live. There are many different cultures in the world and within the United States itself.

Therefore, to answer a question about what is ‘normal’ is often very difficult. What is ‘normal’ to me, my neighborhood, my religion, my state, my province, or my nation may not be considered ‘normal’ to you in your society.

On this website, it is possible to provide mathematical means and averages based on studies, polls, and surveys. However, this information might not be what a specific individual within his own family, culture, and society can use or apply to himself.…

   It is possible for a predominately heterosexual male to develop homosexual feelings. Often, this happens because there is a lack of platonic friendship in common with other male peers. How much friendship and acceptance one needs depends on each particular person.

     I have always been the type to need one or two very close male friends in my life who I see as almost  “brothers.” They are the ones who enable me to develop my gender identity. Some other guys may find acceptance and identity through sports teams/hobby groups or other large organizations (as I did at various points in my life). I have found that a cause of the heterosexual preference is acceptance from people in the same gender and assimilation to that group at critical stages of psychological-sexual development.

     These “critical stages” normally occur before puberty but can be influenced quite a bit during and after adolescence. Everyone has a different level of acceptance and assimilation to that needs to be reached with same-gender friends. Some need a little some need a lot. Some may never find enough acceptance to satisfy them. It all depends on the individual. I have yet to meet one male that did not need some form of acceptance from his gender. Same gender friends do serve some purpose and fulfill some kind of need, otherwise heterosexual males wouldn’t have male friends at all.

     I suppose it is possible to make up for “lost time” by acquiring new same-gender friends but I think that this also would depend on the individual’s needs. When I was deprived of male friends due to change in schools or location, I noticed some homosexual feelings getting more frequent (in my case, thinking about mutual masturbation more often). I also felt arousal and anxiety around other attractive guys during these times. These feelings were not only more frequent but I worried about them more than when I had a platonic social network of other guys. Then, when I made some close male friends and spent time with them often, these feelings seemed to subside quite a bit. They seemed to go away naturally yet they never entirely disappeared forever.

     I must take a moment to point out that homosexual feelings do not necessarily lead to homosexual actions. Often they don’t. The majority of people have had a fantasy about the same sex at some point in their life but few act out on these feelings regularly.

     When I was lonely and deprived again for a period of months or years, they came back strong. I can’t can’t say that all homosexuality comes from lack of supportive and accepting male friends. Homosexuality is not entirely caused because a guy didn’t have enough male friends. But I can say that heterosexuals may acquire homosexual feelings for this reason. It’s also safe to say that some homosexuals end up with a homosexual preference due to the cause listed above. Unfortunately, other genetic and environmental issues play a part in everyone’s sexuality. It’s difficult to say how much of which cause is enough to create a homosexual or heterosexual lifestyle. However, we can say that, at the very least that the three factors of: genetics, environment, and peer acceptance definitely play a role in sexuality development overall. There may be more influential factors still undiscovered or yet to be fully proven.

     I was surprised to find out that this is not the only source that speaks about this phenomenon. The following article, found on the Internet, mentions the same idea of the need for a “same-sex-acceptance”:…

They tell me that gender identity is the new hot topic.  I wondered what exactly that meant. I mean after all hasn’t gender always been an issue, wherever it has been the conflict of being a woman, or a man, and now both. Perhaps in the past, gender issues that affect us today were discussed with far more secrecy and ignorance.  Whereas now with the help of technology and science the gender gaps have become smaller making individuals’ happier in their bodies. Or is it even more confused?

I know that the LGBT community especially our transgender family are still met with considerable discrimination and hatred, however we do live in a time unlike any other where freedom to be ourselves is growing and awareness of differences is discussed openly. However, with knowledge and freedom comes also a sense of confusion, even more classification is required, and perhaps even more loneliness, “now I have all this knowledge what do I do with it?”

Which brings me to an email I received, a sincere letter that demonstrated the double edge sword that is todays gender identify issue, “I know I can be who I want to be, but how do I know what I am?” For some, it is as easy as making a cup of tea, they wake up and regardless of the body parts they know from within the person they are. Whole heartily they will claim their gender identity and live fully, and of course with bravery.

For others, well the lines are grey and distinctions are lost with feelings of having to choose. Why? Why choose any one identity in particular. What if for some of us our true identity is male and female, in equal amounts? What if you are truly both?

Many will fight to say that sex organs do not make the gender. I am one of those people, I don’t believe having a vagina or a penis is the only aspect of gender. Yes, they help to make a general distinction but I feel we are a little more interesting and complicated than that. One piece does not make the whole! For example, when women have their breasts removed or uterus due to medical reasons does that make them any less of a women?

The Native American’s have a beautiful expression for people like us, “two spirited” because in essence with hold both identities, and will feel one side more that another or be perfectly evenly distributed. However, for those who have no concerns as to their place on the gender identity continuum, I know their are many who it’s a daily battle filled with insecurity and loneliness. Here is some information to hopefully to ease your journey to self-peace.

We can experience identity confusion at any age and it can be affected by our environment.  If you are feeling disgusted by your genitals, isolate, are depressed, anxious, wish to get rid of your genitals, your confused about your self-concept, and are feeling suicidal you need to seek treatment in the form of individual therapy.  There are options today that will allow you the space to grow in the direction you see for yourself and people who will help you.

Sex reassignment through surgery and hormonal therapy is an option, but identity problems may continue after these treatment if one is not whole within.  The main reason is if we are not content with ourselves/soul, we will never feel complete with our body, our shell.

Remember:

• The things that bring you happiness, and that all of us are unique in what brings us happiness and peace. Be at awe with who you are, your individuality and do not compare yourself to others.
• Surround yourself with people that support you and make you happy.
• Don’t wallow in the differences but explore the uniqueness, claim it as your own!
• Take off those lenses that make you see the world in black and white, and become a lover of the color that makes your world.
• Be kind to yourself and spend time exploring your wants and needs, not what is expected and socially “normal.”
• Stay healthy. Take care of your body by eating right, seeing your doctor, and getting help for your mind regularly.
• Most importantly, you deserve to be happy and your body can’t create that nor can anyone else. It is in your mind and the beliefs you have of yourself is which happiness is created.

We are only on earth for a short journey, don’t get stuck in the creases of ignorance. Be the Creator of your own path to who you are.…

Want to follow some of the reputed and famous transgender on Instagram in 2022?
If yes, then you are in the right place. Here in this post, we are going to suggest some of the top-rated transgender who is hot and amazing.
So let’s get started with more details about them.

Teddy Quinlivan

Teddy Quinlivan is one of the most attractive transgender models who was on the limelight in 2015. Teddy was introduced by creative directors Louis Vuitton and Nicolas Esquire.
After that, she has participated in several shows for designers like Jason Wu, Carolina Herrera, and Jeremy Scott. You can follow this highly famous transgender in the year 2022 on Instagram.

Leyna Bloom

Leyna Bloom is another reputed transgender who was born on 25th April 1994.

She is known as a famous transgender actress as well as a dancer. She has successfully achieved the covers of magazines like Galore and Candy. You can follow her in 2022 on Instagram for sure.

Lea T

If you are a Brazilian and looking for a reputed Brazilian transgender profile to follow on Instagram in 2022 then you can follow Lea T.
She is one of the most popular models who successfully has been part of several top-class fashion campaigns.
She is popular and well known for her modeling in Riccardo Tisci’s Givenchy and got viral for the nude posing for vogue France.

Ines Rau

Ines Rau is 25 years young transgender model who is very popular among people.
She was born in Paris and started modeling in Paris. You can easily get several steamy photoshoots of her for OOB Magazine with other male supermodels. You can follow her on Instagram to see some of the more photos of her in 2022.

Carmen Carrera

Carmen Carrera is a reputed television star and well known for the burlesque performer.
She got it to limelight after appearing on the third season of Rupaul’s Drag Race. She has been also frequently featured in the project of reputed photographer David La Chapelle. You can follow her on Instagram in 2022 if you are really interested in a reputed female transgender.

Amiyah Scott

Amiyah Scott is a famous transgender you need to follow on Instagram for funny memes and some of the amazing selfies.
No doubt you will find several entertainment stuff on her Instagram account which can make your day. She also shares amazing tips and tricks on how to focus and stick on a particular point.

Jamie Clayton

Jamie Clayton is also a transgender who is very famous among people. She is popular and getting superstardom nowadays because of the popular Netflix series Sense 8. She is stylish and too hot to handle. If you are looking for such an Instagram handle of a beautiful female transgender then you can follow Jamie in 2022.

Final words

Here we are given some of the popular Instagram transgender names who are famous in their field among people.
So just check their Instagram handle and follow them for more attractive videos and photos of them.…