Tag Archives: misogyny

May 16, 2019 · 6:00 am

The (Surprising) Sources And Implications Of Slut Shaming

vicious-cycle-of-shaming

As a fan of romance and people exploring their sexy side, I’m generally opposed to slut shaming. I understand why it exists, to some extent. Nearly every society in history has had certain hang-ups about sex. Considering its role in propagating the species, it’s understandable that people give it extra scrutiny.

That said, I consider slut shaming a misguided form of scrutiny. The definition, itself, has some ugly implications that go far beyond the inherent risks associated with being reckless, promiscuous, and irresponsible.

For one, it’s almost entirely heaped upon women. James Bond never gets called a slut for his promiscuous behavior. Instead, he gets to be a masculine icon. A woman who has just as much sex gets called a slut and is often painted as deviant. Look no further than legendary Bond girls like Xania Onatopp and Pussy Galore for proof of that.

While it can be pretty overt in popular media, it’s even more pernicious in real life. From women who choose wear revealing clothing to those who actively attempt to confront sexual stigma, there’s no shortage of shaming from multiple directions. It’s frustrating in that it amounts to incessant whining about how other people choose to live their lives, but recent research has cast slut shaming in a new light.

A study published in the Journal of Evolution and Human Behavior attempted to analyze how behaviors associated with slut shaming differed among genders. The popular narrative is that men do most of the slut shaming. The logic is that men see beautiful women having a lot of sex. That bothers them because those women aren’t having sex with them.

Granted, that’s a gross generalization that I’m sure many men and even a few women find offensive. Despite the details, that is the common narrative and it tends to play out in one too many teen comedies. However, science has a way of disrupting those narratives in unexpected ways.

The study revealed that while men and women were equally likely to not trust promiscuous women, women who were more likely to favor punishing those women. In a comprehensive summary conducted by PsyPost, the differences were pretty striking.

“In the study, participants played one of three kinds of economic decision-making games. The participants were led to believe they were playing against a female opponent in real-time, but were actually only interacting with computerized responses.

The opponents varied in whether they appeared to be sexually accessible or sexually restricted. For some participants, the opponent was depicted as a woman wearing a tight, red outfit and an abundance of makeup. For others, the opponent was depicted as a woman wearing loose-fitting clothing with less makeup.

The researchers found that both male and female participants were less willing to share money with a woman wearing the tight outfit. The participants also trusted sexually-accessible opponents with a financial investment less than sexually-restrictive opponents.

Women, but not men, were also willing to inflict punishments on a sexually-accessible female opponent who made an unfair offer, even though it left them empty-handed as well.

Given the choice between receiving a small sum of money while their opponent took a large sum or having neither player receive any money at all, women tended to pick the latter option.”

Take a moment to comprehend what this does to the slut shaming narrative. For those who idealize that 1950s sitcom family life that never truly existed, it’s an aberration. While those women make for good one-night-stands, they hardly make for quality long-term relationships.

Why, then, would men be reluctant to punish those women? I’ve noted before how society tends to micromanage women’s bodies. Slut shaming is only a half-measure because it offers no tangible punishment. While certain societies don’t mind punishing promiscuous women, it doesn’t appear to be entirely predicated on male attitudes.

This study shows that women are just as mistrustful of promiscuous women and are willing to go further in terms of punishing their behavior. The reasons for this are difficult to surmise. The researchers hypothesized that men were primarily concerned with avoiding investment in a child that wasn’t theirs. From an evolutionary standpoint, that’s something to avoid, but not punish.

Conversely, women may be more concerned with the bigger picture. The researchers surmised that women had an evolutionary imperative to keep the cost of sex high to improve their value as potential partners. Actively punishing potential rivals further served that purpose.

From a logistical standpoint, it makes sense. They see beautiful, promiscuous women as people who use cheat codes in video games. They have an unfair advantage when it comes to attracting potential partners and that has significant consequences, especially to those who aren’t beautiful or sexually flexible.

Beyond distracting partners who might otherwise be interested in them, it lowers the value of the sex they have to offer. Why would men be as interested in having sex with them when there are promiscuous women who were willing to give it to them for a lower cost with fewer strings?

While I believe this may be a factor for some women, it’s also another broad generalization that would offend more than a few women. It assumes too much about how they think and feel. Believing women slut shame because it hinders their own sexual value is as absurd as blaming all misogyny on some vast patriarchal conspiracy.

Like all research, the study is limited and can only reveal so much about the complexities of human behavior. The researchers themselves freely admitted this, but that’s exactly why it warrants further study. Like it or not, slut shaming is still prominent in most modern societies. I would argue that the internet and social media are making it worse.

At the same time, I also believe that slut shaming is something we should confront. It causes real harm to real people. It damages our love lives, our sex lives, and everything in between. There are instances in which someone’s irresponsible sexual behavior genuinely warrants scrutiny, but shaming can only serve to make things worse, even for people who aren’t sluts.

3 Comments

Filed under gender issues, human nature, men's issues, outrage culture, political correctness, psychology, sex in media, sex in society, sexuality, women's issues

Tagged as , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

May 15, 2018 · 5:29 am

What Radical Feminists and Incel Men Have In Common

bandw-man-and-woman-arguing

Since I’ve been browsing the internet, I’ve tried to keep up with its assorted jargon, slang, and euphemisms. Given the rapid pace of technology and the uneven pace at which society adapts, it can be pretty daunting. There are times I feel like I have fallen behind. I still remember feeling foolish when I asked someone what a hashtag was.

While I make an effort to keep up, there are certain parts of net-based sub-culture that I prefer to avoid. I’m not just talking about Twilight message boards. I’m talking about the kind of domains on the internet where people who have genuine, in-need-of-help problems congregate to whine, complain, and otherwise compound their problems.

One such sub-culture that I’ve avoided talking about on this site or in general is that of the so-called incel community. For those of you who haven’t heard of it, and I envy those who had avoided it thus far, incel stands for “involuntary celibate.” In essence, they identify themselves as men who would like to have sex, but cannot because women and society at large has prevented this. It’s as crass as it sounds, but it gets much worse.

I would’ve been content to never even mention the incel community on this site. Then, a self-identified incel carried out a deadly attack in Toronto that killed 10 people and suddenly incels weren’t just in the news. They were a genuine danger. Since I try to discuss relevant topics on this site, be they sex robots or superhero movies, I’m going to grit my teeth and talk about this frustrating phenomenon.

It’s not just frustrating because it gives men, masculinity, and people with poor social skills a bad name. It’s frustrating because it’s so inherently pathetic and juvenile. Moreover, it’s something that has an ironic, but fitting parallel with radical feminism.

Yes, I know that sounds counter-intuitive. I also imagine there are some self-identified feminists out there who want to punch me through their computer screen. To those individuals, I ask that you restrain yourself for just a moment so I can explain.

Before I go any further, I want to make one thing clear. I do not associate radical feminism with more mainstream brands of feminism that, for the most part, are fairly reasonable in their rhetoric and sincere in their efforts. I also want to make clear that I do not associate the incel community with men’s rights activists, who are every bit as reasonable and sincere.

The incel community and radical feminists are extremists, plain and simple. They don’t even try to be reasonable. Like the extremists of a religion or political ideology, they cannot and will not be dissuaded. Their attitudes and conduct are built on a foundation of unceasing, uncompromising outrage.

This is where, ironically and fittingly, both incels and radical feminists intersect. They are, to a large extent, defined by their outrage. They despise a world that they feel has deprived them of something they deserve. They carry themselves as perpetual victims, trapped in a society that actively plots against them to keep them miserable.

You don’t have to look too far to see the similarities here. The incel community doesn’t even try to hide its blatant misogyny, just as radical feminists don’t even try to hide their overt man-hating. The targets of their hate are different, but the intent behind it is the same.

The hatred is a catalyst and a rallying point for those inclined to embrace more extreme forms of ideology. That hatred simplifies complex issues, allows them generalize large swaths of people, and believe without question that there’s a cabal of evil bullies actively plotting against them. They are basically the Alex Jones of gender conflicts.

It’s for that reason that few take them seriously, even within feminist and men’s rights communities. Even when a radical feminist claims all heterosexual sex is rape or an incel man claims that all women are sluts, they’re either ignored or written off as trolls. However, in wake of recent events, that’s getting somewhat harder.

Between the attacks in Toronto and the growing spread of outrage culture, both radical feminism and the incel community have many ways of making their voices louder and spreading their hatred. Like any extreme within an ideology, they will complicate or outright corrupt reasonable debate on reasonable issues involving gender.

I believe those issues should be discussed and I’ve tried to approach them on this site in as balanced a way I can, at least to the extent I can as a man and an aspiring erotica/romance writer. However, in the same way creationism obscures science, radical gender ideology obscures real gender issues.

It even goes beyond derailing otherwise important debates about relevant issues. In the one area where both incel men and radical feminists are most alike goes back to their attitudes. Beyond the hate and trolling, there’s one other trait that binds them. They embrace and cling to the idea of perpetual victim-hood.

Incel men believe they are victims of greedy, selfish women who refuse to give them the sex and intimacy they want. Radical Feminsts believe they are victims of a greedy, oppressive patriarchy that only exists to bully them and hold them back. In that context, they are always victims. They never have to claim a shred of responsibility. They can just blame their perceived oppressors.

That’s not just insulting to real victims. It’s flat out lazy. Incel men and radical feminists carry themselves as though other people must go out of their way to give them something, be it sex, justice, or reparations of some sort. They, themselves, don’t have to do anything. They just whine, complain, and shame others to get what they want.

I would call that approach childish, but that would be insulting to children. The absurdity of that mentality is impossible to overstate. However, and I think reasonable feminists and men’s right activists would agree, there are a few basic truths that we all must accept, regardless of our gender.

The universe is not fair.

Some people are born with more advantages than others.

Nobody owes you anything, be it sex or preferential treatment.

Respect, achievement, and merit must be earned and not given.

These are the simple, inescapable facts of life. We learn them at some point in our lives. Some take longer than others, though. What makes incels and radical feminists so similar, and so unworthy of respect, is how they utterly refuse to learn those lessons. As a result, they’re just setting themselves up for more frustration.

6 Comments

Filed under gender issues, human nature, political correctness, sex in society, sexuality

Tagged as , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

March 26, 2018 · 5:36 am

Implications And Predictions In France’s Battle Against Sex Dolls

high-end-american-adult-gifts-usa-sex-dolls

When it comes to making predictions about the future, I don’t consider myself all that prophetic. When it involves issues like sex, our attitudes towards it, and all the crazy ways we try to navigate it, I like to think that writing sexy stories gives me some added insight.

As complex, diverse, and irrational as people can be, especially when it comes to sex, we tend to be predictable when it comes to how we react to upheavals in the sexual landscape. Honestly, is anyone really that surprised when internet porn becomes controversial?

The general rule of thumb is that if it something subverts a certain sexual norm, such as removing an expected consequence of sex or undermining a long-standing tradition, someone is going to oppose it. If it somehow makes sex easier to enjoy, but doesn’t involve producing more taxpayers/adherents to government and religion, it’s going to be labeled a moral crisis.

Image result for religion hates sex

That’s why nobody should be surprised that when Paris opened a brothel that exclusively utilized sex dolls instead of actual prostitutes, it was controversial. However, the nature of that controversy is different than past efforts to enforce the de-facto state of prudishness. This isn’t just something that moral crusaders and religious zealots oppose. This may very well be a sign of things to come.

For some context, the story is fairly simple. It’s not some crude joke from the pages of The Onion. There really was a brothel in Paris that allowed individual and couples to pay money to “rent” a high-end sex doll. Ignoring, for a moment, the natural aversion to using a sex doll that someone else had used, the concept makes sense from a purely economic standpoint.

Image result for sex doll brothel

As it stands, operating a brothel and living off the proceeds of a prostitute is illegal in France. In 2011, it also became illegal to buy sexual services, although it’s still legal to sell them. It’s a messy web that complicates the sex industry throughout Paris, but that’s exactly why a business like this works.

On paper, there are no prostitutes involved. They’re using sex dolls. People aren’t buying sex, per se. They’re renting a very fancy sexy toy to use for a while. Renting, using, or buying sex toys is not illegal in France. Other than taking customers away from real prostitutes, this operation was basically an elaborate, yet pragmatic way to circumvent the complications of prostitution laws.

However, the fact the brothel tried to circumvent the law wasn’t the issue. The primary reason for the push to shut it down wasn’t because it offended some uptight religious zealots, who have historically been the most common opponents of sexual upheavals. The main reason came from an emerging branch of feminism, claiming that such an operation was basically a catalyst for rape.

Image result for sex doll brothel

Now, I try not to cast too broad a brush when it comes to feminism. In the past, I have made it a point to distinguish that there are positive brands of feminism, as well as some inherently regressive kinds. This kind is definitely consistent with the latter. It’s not using the same morality approach that religious zealots have used in the past, but the tactics are the same.

According to a feminist group in France, the brothel is basically a den of rape. It’s very existence promotes the kind of rape culture that feminists have been protesting with increasing fervor over the past few years. These are their exact words, according to The Local.

Lorraine Questiaux of the feminist group Mouvement du Nid (Nest Movement) has argued that Xdolls is making money from “simulating the rape of a woman.”

“Can we in France approve a business that is based on the promotion of rape?” she asked.

On one hand, I can sort of see where they’re coming from, thinking that people may simulate rape fantasies in this place and that can’t be healthy. On the other, I can’t really take those concerns it seriously because it assumes an awful lot about how other people think and feel about sex dolls.

Image result for man with sex doll

Simple, non-kinky logic says that you cannot rape a sex doll any more than you can rape a dirty washcloth in the shower. It’s possible that some people may have some really twisted thoughts when they’re using a sex doll or acting out a fantasy, but to assume those are the only thoughts that every person end up thinking is a gross generalization of the vast complexity that is human sexuality.

The police in Paris seemed to agree with that logic. No matter how outraged the feminist group might have been, their protest had no legal standing and rightly so. This is what the police said, once again according to The Local.

But a police source said that while the brothel posed moral questions, the use of the word rape was not legally relevant in this context.

“You cannot accuse a man of raping a doll. It is as if a woman were to file a complaint with the police against a dildo,” the source told Le Parisien.

Most reasonable people, and probably most non-radical feminists for that matter, would agree with that logic. In a perfect world, that would be the end of the issue. Since we don’t live in a perfect world, even if it’s a better world than most realize, it’s unreasonable to assume that this is the last we’ll hear of this issue.

It’s here where I’m going to make a few predictions. As always, I need to make clear that I cannot see the future any better than those reading this article. However, I’ve studied enough sexual upheavals in history, both in centuries past and in more recent times, to see where this is going. The fact that this was even a news story is a sign that there’s something much bigger coming.

Image result for women's protest

Whatever it is, it’s probably going to supplement the ongoing anti-harassment movement that continues to make headlines, although not for the right reasons. It’s also going to become more relevant as advances in sex dolls and, eventually, sex robots continue to occur at a rapid pace. Even before sex robots gain a measure of sentience, there will be a concerted effort to stop them.

If anything, this story out of Paris is going to motivate other feminist groups with a distinctly sex-negative ideology to step up their efforts. No ideology likes to lose and I suspect they’ll see this story as a new front in the battle against rape culture and male domination. It’s not enough to make gains in the workplace or in entertainment. Even having men pretend to be dominant is dangerous, from their perspective.

These efforts to regulate or shame the use of sex dolls will follow the similar tactics used in other anti-prostitution efforts. As I’ve noted before, those efforts tend to skew the sexual marketplace, inflating the value of one kind of sex while attempting to manipulate how sex is pursued by those in positions of power. Sex dolls and sex robots don’t just change the marketplace. They may very well collapse it.

Image result for sex robots

On some levels, I suspect that both the extreme regressive on one side of the spectrum and the moral crusaders on the other side already understand this. They know that if sex dolls and sex robots become sufficiently advanced, then the current system that they prefer becomes less sustainable.

They lose power and influence, as a result. Even in non-sexual matters, people fight to retain their power. Whether you’re an outdated business or just part of the demographic that benefits the most from the current system, you’re going to fight to preserve the status quo and you’re going to make any excuse necessary to do so.

That’s why I suspect that the absurd notion that sex dolls promote rape will become a major talking point in the near-future. There may even be bogus studies conducted by biased researchers, funded by the anti-sex equivalent of the Koch brothers, claiming there’s a link between rape and sex dolls.

Image result for sex robots

From there, pundits and politicians will cite those flawed studies to justify laws and regulations against sex dolls. They already do it with internet porn and video games. It probably won’t take much convincing that a sex dolls, which literally cannot give consent, somehow encourage rape. It’ll become a buzzword and a moral panic, the idea that these dolls will condition people to become rapists.

I don’t think it’ll get quite to the same level as the Satanic Panic of the 1980s, but I suspect there will be plenty of outrage for those who see more people seeking the company of sex dolls rather than jumping through whatever elaborate hoops our culture creates for pursuing sex. It’s already hectic, given all the concerns about harassment and the devastating impacts of divorce laws.

In the end, though, I suspect that these efforts won’t win out in the long run. There’s just too much incentive and too much appeal to both sex dolls and sex robots for any moral crusade to stop it. The human libido is too strong and the potential profits to be made are too great.

Image result for sex robots

Historically, fighting something that’s fueled by the human sex drive is a losing battle, but one that certain groups insist on fighting. While I don’t know what form it’ll take, I expect that fighting to escalate in the coming years. This story out of France may end up being the first shot.

6 Comments

Filed under Current Events, gender issues, human nature, sex in society, sex robots, sexuality

Tagged as , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

December 8, 2017 · 5:51 am

Gal Gadot’s Message To Misogynists (And Why It’s Incomplete)

It has been a good year for Gal Gadot. When you’re the woman who brought Wonder Woman to life in one of the most successful movies of 2017, as well as the highest grossing superhero origins movie of all time, you can objectively say you’re doing pretty damn well for yourself.

Ms. Gadot has every reason to be confident and not just because she’s the second woman since Lynda Carter who can call herself Wonder Woman with a straight face. She didn’t just make the “Wonder Woman” movie an unmitigated success while also getting Chris Pine naked in the process. She did it in a way that was truly empowering to women, female superheroes, and guys who just appreciate women who can kick ass.

As such, Ms. Gadot’s words carry a lot more weight than most people, regardless of their gender. She could say tomorrow that pineapples and beaver testicles are the greatest pizza topping of all time and we, as a society, would still take her seriously. That’s how much power you get from making an awesome “Wonder Woman” and doing part of it while pregnant, no less.

That’s why when, during a promotional interview with IGN with her “Justice League” co-star, Ezra Miller, Ms. Gadot made a bold proclamation. Granted, it wasn’t entirely serious and Miller had goaded her, but since she’s Gal “Wonder Woman” Gadot, these words still carry weight.

“Misogynist sexists, your wrath upon this world is over!”

If you want to see the full interview in order to get the full context of the statement, which is important here, you can watch the video here.

Again, the statement wasn’t on the same level as a full-blown protest, complete with bra burning. This is her and a co-star goofing around, but some of that sentiment stems directly from some distressing recent events involving powerful men being dicks to women. These issues are serious, bringing out the best and worst in people.

That’s why Ms. Gadot’s message matters. As I write these words, there are probably people out there taking them far more seriously than she intended. Some may even use it as a rallying cry to wage war against everyone with a penis who dared to have a dirty thought about a beautiful woman. While those people may be a fringe minority, the message still resonates, due to the unique time we find ourselves in, as a culture.

There’s no question that 2017 is a turning point and not just for female superhero movies like “Wonder Woman.” USA Today is already calling it “The Harvey Weinstein Effect” and has been maintaining a list of powerful men who have lost their jobs and/or reputations, due to sexual misconduct.

At this point, even if you’re a card-carrying member of the patriarchy, you can’t deny the growing trend. It’s gotten to a point where anytime you see a male public figure’s name trending on social media, there’s a good chance that they’re somehow involved in some sordid sexual misconduct. Say what you will about the merits of this trend, but it’s happening.

Going back to Ms. Gadot’s bold proclamation, I think it’s partially accurate in that it’s already being fulfilled. Powerful men who have harassed women are losing power, reputation, and influence. Influential organizations are cutting ties with those who are embroiled in sex scandals.

If you’re a powerful man who loves using his power to coerce sexual favors, this is not a good time for you and Ms. Gadot’s words should strike fear in you. While that part of her statement is valid, and most people would probably agree with it, there is one issue with it. It’s incomplete.

By that, I don’t mean Ms. Gadot misspoke. I am not foolish enough to tell Wonder Woman herself how she should talk when she could probably kill me with her pinkie toe. In terms of the overall substance of her message, though, it’s one of those instances where the rhetoric is more ambitious than the words.

The problem is that the message gives the impression that there’s an actual war going on. Coming from Gal Gadot, who served in the Israeli army before becoming Wonder Woman, it makes sense for her to frame it in such a way.

However, when it comes to powerful men exploiting vulnerable women, that’s not a war. That’s an societal problem on top of a leverage problem on top of a biological problem within the ongoing problem that is our caveman brains. Granted, that’s a lot of problems, but framing it as a war only compounds them.

That’s because wars, and wraths by default, are chaotic and bloody. Wars have casualties and most of the time, they’re not just enemy soldiers. Declaring a war on something, even if it’s an objectively bad thing, is bound to stir chaos that will affect others than the intended targets. Just look at the casualties in the ongoing war on drugs for distressing proof of that.

Ms. Gadot’s comment also implies there’s some shadowy army of evil Harvey Weinstein clones, each plotting and planning to create a world where they can harass and assault women with impunity. That may very well be a plot for another Wonder Woman movie, but it’s not reflective of the real world.

The kind of misogyny that creates men like Harvey Weinstein is not the result of some shadowy conspiracy that only Alex Jones would buy into. They’re largely a result of unequal power structures, outdated ideas about gender roles, and people generally taking advantage of opportunities that other horny men can only dream of.

It’s not an agenda or a wrath that’s in play here. It’s injustice and exploitation, coupled with greed and corruption. That, in and of itself, is a pretty toxic combination that affects people of any gender. It can get pretty bad at every levels of power, but it’s not just restricted to misogyny or general sexism.

Now, there’s no question that there’s still a lot of injustice and sexism in the world. If Ms. Gadot wants to fight that, both as an advocate and as Wonder Woman, I would gladly fight beside her, along with anyone else who would heed her call. That call, however, can’t be the same as a war cry against a secret cabal of misogynist sexists. It has to have more substance than that.

For the most part, people already despise misogynist sexists. Neither Ms. Gadot nor Wonder Woman need to convince anyone of that. Men with sordid pasts are already seeing their reputations and authority being undermined by recent efforts. Ms. Gadot herself even played a part in one of them involving Brett Ratner.

However, it can’t be like Wonder Woman’s final battle against Ares in the “Wonder Woman” movie. That’s not how sexism manifests in the real world. It’s not one of those things that can be fought with fists and godly powers. It’s one of those things that can only be fought with understanding, knowledge, and compassion, all of which are among Wonder Woman’s core tenants.

I don’t know what a better rallying cry would be for Ms. Gadot. Even if I did, it wouldn’t mean much coming from a male erotica/romance writer. Sexual harassment, sexual assault, and sexism are all serious issues. As such, any effort to confront them needs to start with the right message and I hope Gal Gadot is among those who delivers that message.

1 Comment

Filed under Celebrities and Celebrity Culture, Comic Books, Jack Fisher, Superheroes, gender issues

Tagged as , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

July 13, 2017 · 7:02 am

Why Fascists Want To (And Need To) Control Your Sex Life

Whenever I bring up a topic on this blog, be it advances in biotechnology or news on the “Wonder Woman” movie, it’s only a matter of time before I explore the sexy side of that topic. Sometimes that also involves the kinky side, but sometimes sexy and kinky aren’t mutually exclusive issues in certain topics.

Now, when it comes to issues of fascism and totalitarian governments, it’s hard to make that too sexy. However, it’s hard to discuss these issues without also discussing the implications on our sex lives. Even the most repressive governments still need people having sex o they can make babies that will eventually become works, soldiers, etc.

Throughout history, the government has always had some interest or policy in our sex lives. From state-sanctioned fertility festivals in Ancient Rome to rigid traditions in Ancient China, there’s always been some amount of government between the sheets. So those yelling for government to get out of their bedrooms probably don’t realize just how long it has been there.

For the most part, a government’s only real interest in your sex life extended to whether or not you were producing children that would become soldiers, workers, and tax payers. Beyond that, it could care less what you do with your genitals and how you do it. Those governments usually lacked the power, resources, and will to micromanage.

There were some exceptions, primarily with the sex lives of rulers and aristocrats. Since preserving the royal lineage was of the most vital importance, often leading to massive upheaval in a kingdom, they had to micromanage to some extent. If they weren’t producing heirs to the throne or to inherit the family land, then that was a problem. The entire premise of “Game of Thrones” is proof of that.

However, the world has changed a great deal since the days of kings, feudalism, and fertility rituals. Industrialization, modernization, and a better understanding of how our sexy anatomy works has changed how the people and the government approaches matters of sexuality. Sure, some people in government still have a poor understanding of certain lady parts, but our knowledge is more comprehensive for the most part.

It’s because of that knowledge, though, that a fascist or overly authoritarian regime has an even greater interest in controlling your sex life. At least the kings and emperors of the ancient world lost interest at the part where your sex life made the babies that would become soldiers and workers. Modern rulers with a keen interest in controlling a population know to go much further than that.

The best example of this is how Nazi Germany and Fascist Italy approached its citizens’ sex lives. For these governments, it wasn’t enough for people to make babies that would become soldiers and workers. They had to make perfect, super-babies and a lot of them. That whole “master race” ideology wasn’t just about subverting minorities. At some point, they need to have the race they prefer to propagate.

Sometimes, they did this through incentives. Giving birth to a healthy, racially pure baby in Nazi Germany came with all sorts of benefits. However, those benefits sometimes hid the heavy hand of the state. Women in this society were not expected to work. Their sole focus was supposed to be on producing more racially pure babies.

It wasn’t much different or better for women in Fascist Italy. While it didn’t rely heavily on concepts of genetic purity or racial supremacy, there was this ideal espoused by the state. The perfect woman, in their eyes, was supposed to be poor, subservient, and doing everything she could to give birth to as many babies as possible.

Beyond simply controlling the population, these fascist states also sought to control the nuts and bolts of family life. There was only one ideal family structure and one form of acceptable sexual activity. Any citizen that deviated from it in any way, be it homosexuality or watching certain types of porn, was prohibited.

Again, it goes several steps further than the prudish policies we sometimes get in non-fascist states. In America, we had policies like the Comstock Laws that effectively made talking about sexual issues a crime. Even today, issues surrounding sex education, which are prescribed by the government, are subject to plenty of controversy.

However, it’s that very presence of a controversy that highlights just how different a fascist state approaches sexuality compared to a non-fascist one. Say what you will about America and western governments. At least it’s possible to have a debate about sexual issues. It’s not always productive, but having that debate won’t get you killed.

The same can’t be said in a fascist state because controlling sexuality isn’t just necessary for population control. It’s a primary component of maintaining its overall power. A fascist state, by definition, needs to exercise a lot of control over its people. In general, people don’t like to be controlled. History shows it’s hard to control people. Even organized religion is finding this out.

For any fascist state to maintain control, it needs to be able to control the two most important drives in human beings, namely survival and reproduction. It needs to make sure that the citizens are completely dependent on the state to fulfill those drives.

It’s somewhat easier to confiscate food and use hunger to keep people in line. If someone is hungry, they’ll say or do anything to get a good meal, especially if a government dangles it in front of them as incentive.

The same applies to sex. Through policy, policing, and public shaming, it can dissuade people from exercising their sexuality in ways that the fascist state does not sanction. Like hunger, those who are horny will do anything they can to fulfill that basic drive. Some religions have already weaponized this drive. A fascist state would make it part of a larger system.

It’s because of that systemic approach to sexuality that it’s hard to claim that modern conservatives or liberals are seeking to control sexuality on the same levels as a fascist state. I know I make a lot of jokes about Rick Santorum’s views on sexuality, but he’s never favored creating an entire bureau of government to ensure that people have only the kind of sex that he approves of.

I also make a lot of jokes about how sex-negative radical feminism is making us more sexually uptight. While those on the more extreme liberal side of the spectrum may protest and shame those who dare exercise a form of sex they don’t like, they don’t actively ask the government the manage the sex lives of others.

That’s not to say both sides don’t have ridiculous, harmful, and often detrimental views of sexuality. They’re just not even in the same hemisphere as a fascist state, which would use human sexuality as a method of controlling its population.

It’s not just that a fascist state tends to be inherently prudish and tradition. It has to control things like sexuality because it has to control the people to achieve its goals, be it stability or some sort of racial agenda. So if and when the day comes when you need government approval to have an orgasm, you’ll know you’re living in a fascist state.

4 Comments

Filed under Jack Fisher's Insights

Tagged as , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

October 14, 2016 · 6:53 am

Thought Experiments On Double Standards

I’ve done a lot of whining on gender and double standards this week. For that, I apologize. I know that’s a real mood-killer. I’m an aspiring erotica/romance writer. Talking about these issues isn’t making anyone horny. That’s not good for my creative energy or my prospective customers.

That said, I’m not a fan of whining just for the sake of whining. That’s what children, internet trolls, and annoying reality TV stars do when they want to distract themselves from how little they actually contribute to society. I’m not a whiner. My parents had a low tolerance for whiners. Whining isn’t sexy and even the best erotica/romance writer in the world can’t make it sexy.

I bring issues like double standards up because it’s not just relevant in terms of where our society is at the moment. It also affects my work. When I’m working on a novel, I find myself hesitating at times to take the story in certain directions because of the gender of the characters involved.

One particular issue that came up recently involved my book, “The Final Communion.” That book has a sizable glut of erotica elements, to say the very least, but I did find myself struggling with certain scenes. I always intended to tell the story from the perspective of a female character. However, when I brought some male characters into the mix, I struggled at times to give them the depth I wanted.

This is largely because within those erotica elements, it’s hard to develop male characters outside the expectations we have towards society as a whole. Compared to women, those expectations are horribly skewed and unbalanced. We expect men to be aggressive. We expect men to be callous. We expect men to jump through any number of hoops just to get a chance at having sex. Do you see the running theme here?

I admit I played into some of those expectations in “The Final Communion.” I tried to add depth where I could, but it’s unavoidable in some respects. Our culture and our expectations shape our collective tastes. It affects how we relate to one another, how we seek love with one another, and how aspiring erotica/romance writers craft their novels.

So far, I feel like I’ve painted a bleak picture of sorts. I’m giving the impression that it’s hopeless. Men and women will never get along. They’ll never be equal. There will always be conflict between the horny men who just want to have sex without all the red tape and the horny women who want to just want to have sex without the stigma.

Does this mean double standards will never go away? Well, I don’t like to think in terms of such absolutes. At the moment, the research is not all that promising. According to an article in Psychology Today from 2014, which cited multiple studies, this is our current situation:

  1. Unlike premarital sex in committed relationships, which was once a hot-button topic but now viewed as OK by most Americans, the battle over the acceptability of casual sex has not (yet) been won by either side.

  2. A multitude of attitudes exist simultaneously among young people: Some consider casual sex wrong for everyone; others consider it OK for everyone; and others still consider it wrong for some but not for others.

  3. Women continue to be more conservative than men in their attitudes toward casual sex in general.

  4. There is still a double standard in the population as a whole, but only a minority of young men and women endorses it.

  5. Among those who endorse a traditional double standard, most are men.

The data is mixed, as it often is with all the insane complexities of the human condition. It’s also not final. No study ever is and those claiming to be are probably funded by tobacco companies, the Koch brothers, and the Vatican.

At the very least, it does highlight some trends that offer at least some glimmers of hope. Most notably, it reveals that Rick Santorum’s efforts have failed miserably. Acceptance of pre-marital sex is becoming so common that we’ve stopped punching each other in the genitals over the issue. When there are so many health benefits to orgasms and promiscuity, I call this a win.

However, even as acceptance of pre-marital sex grows, our inclination to shame others and whine about it still lingers. This is to be expected. Human beings are amazing creatures, but we’re still at the mercy of clunky, inefficient biological processes that often manifest in our societies.

Hell, we still have countries in this world where women don’t even have the right to drive a car. We can’t expect some of these outdated attitudes to disappear just because enough people whine about it.

For me, the most promising revelations of this study is that, while the sexual double standards for men and women are still there, the participants don’t exactly approve of it. This, to me, is the glimmer of hope that’s worth highlighting.

A lot of these double standards aren’t overt. They don’t walk up to you, slap you in the face, and scream into your ear for five hours every day. We tend to fall into them for the same reason we thought wearing bell-bottom pants was fashionable. It’s just the collective tastes of our peers that we don’t notice or scrutinize.

However, if you point it out to people and make them aware of it, they see the inherent unfairness of these double standards. That’s important because fairness is one of those powerful concepts that’s very important to the survival of a highly social species like ours. We don’t have the teeth of a shark or the muscles of King Kong. We need to work together to survive. That means fairness is a big fucking deal.

Current research also supports this. According to a study published in 2012 in Psychology Science, infants in the second year of life already possess context-sensitive expectations relevant to fairness. That means even when some of us are still in diapers, we have bullshit detectors that reveal the inherent unfairness of these double standards.

I still concede that some of these double standards have some basis in caveman logic, but only to a limited extent. It’s culture, injustice, and unequal power structures that skew these standards to an excessive degree.

For this reason, I believe that the double standards we apply to genders with respect to sex will one day fade, just as our attitudes towards casual sex did. It won’t happen overnight. We probably won’t even notice it. Angry old people complaining about today’s youth will still probably whine about it, but some people will always find a reason to whine. It’s better for society as a whole if we don’t make it easier for them.

With that in mind, let’s try a little thought experiment, which I hope to explore in future books. Let’s imagine a time several decades into the future where these egregious double standards between men and women simply fall out of favor. By all accounts, society is equal with respect to gender, or at least as equal as any sexually dimorphic species will allow.

This means that men and women are punished equitably for the same crimes. Nobody shames each other for having too much sex or wanting more sex than they have. Radical feminists and men’s rights activists aren’t influential or are all dead from whining themselves to death. What kind of society would that be? How would it operate?

Picture the following scenario. It’s one I’ve used before, but let’s apply the thought experiment to it.

Man: Hello ma’am. You look very beautiful today.

Woman: Thank you. You look quite handsome yourself.

Man: Thank you. I appreciate that. Listen, I’m single at the moment. I’m not looking for any long-term relationships at this point of my life, but I find you very sexually appealing and if you want, I’d like to have sex with you tonight.

Woman: I appreciate your honesty. I’m single at the moment too. I’m certainly open to long-term relationships, but I respect your current desire. And since I find you sexually appealing too, I’d be happy to have sex with you tonight.

Man: Great! Would you like to do it at my place or yours?

Woman: Let’s do mine. I live closer. It’s just easier.

I admit this is a laughably simplistic scenario. It’s so simplistic that it wouldn’t even qualify as a script in a low-budget porn movie. Even so, it highlights the necessary elements.

Two consenting adults walk up to one another. They don’t bother with elaborate flirtations or games. They just honestly tell one another what they want and respect each other’s desires. That’s as simple and basic as it needs to be.

This same scenario could’ve even played out another way. Consider this.

Man: Hello ma’am. You look very beautiful today.

Woman: Thank you.

Man: Listen, I’m single at the moment. I’m not looking for any long-term relationships at this point of my life, but I find you very sexually appealing and if you want, I’d like to have sex with you tonight.

Woman: I appreciate your honesty. I’m single at the moment too, but I’m afraid I don’t find you sexually appealing. I’m also not really in the mood for sex right now. I appreciate the offer though. I’m sorry.

Man: That’s okay. I’m disappointed, but I understand.

Woman: Thank you.

Again, it’s laughably simplistic, but it reflects the same underlying theme. Both individuals are up front and honest with their desires. Men don’t have to act like James Bond and women don’t have to act like every female character in “Seinfeld.” They can just be fair and honest with each other in matters of sex, love, and desire. What a concept, right?

I offer this thought experiment because some of my ideas for novels take place in the future. I enjoy looking to the future and imagining how our world and our society will change, both in terms of technology and in terms of how we’ll relate to one another.

It’s a concept I don’t see explored often in romance or erotica. I’d like to explore it in whatever unique way my perverse mind can conjure. I don’t have any clear plans at the moment, but when I do, rest assured I’ll do what I can to make those plans sexy as hell.

5 Comments

Filed under Jack Fisher's Insights

Tagged as , , , , , , , , ,