07.12.11
Erica Jong — a leading proponent of women’s sexual liberation — wrote an op-ed in The New York Times saying that today’s young women are “over” sex. The novelty of sexual freedom (in the 1960s, 70s, 80s and even in the 90s) has worn off, and we’re now reverting back to the 1950s housewife lifestyle of “motherhood and monogamy.” Rather than craving open marriages, free love and unapologetic promiscuity, today’s young women are apathetic when it comes to sexual liberation and this, according to Erica, threatens to “destroy women’s equality” — everything that our mothers and grandmothers fought for.
The Huffington Post rounded up a bunch of responses, all basically saying that Erica is completely out of touch with what real young women are actually doing. Erica is focusing on 30-something women who are bored of their 20-something dating lives and want to settle down and become mothers. Young women are still having plenty of liberated sex, they just aren’t talking about it as much.
But then there’s me, a 24-year-old married mother, meekly raising my hand. “Where do I fit in?”
I absolutely, unequivocally know that young 20-something women (women that I know and love) are still having what Erica calls “liberated sex.” They’re still dating and drinking and having one-night stands. But I also know more young women who would rather find someone to settle down with. Erica acts like the media now paints sex as being dangerous (see even SATC‘s Samantha got breast cancer! Proof!) in the same way that the The Scarlet Letter-era oppressed women’s sexuality. But we’re not punishing women for being overly sexual, it’s just that we’ve come to find that those free-love-hippies contracted a slew of STDs, had unwanted pregnancies and died from AIDs. Erica even goes on to say that this “apathy” to sex threatens birth control and abortion rights, but that’s assuming birth control and abortions are a means to have as much sex as we want without the consequences. Except that there are consequences — emotionally as well as physically. But just because more young women are over the idea of sexual promiscuity doesn’t mean that we don’t want birth control or the option of safe abortions. And it certainly doesn’t mean that we’re over sex. Irresponsible sex? Maybe. But passion-driven sex? Never.
Yet according to Erica, it’s the children in our beds who drive away sexual passion. “Better to give up men and sleep with one’s children,” she writes. “Better to wear one’s baby in a man-distancing sling and breast-feed at all hours so your mate knows your breasts don’t belong to him.” But when the commenters shoot back that, Hey, this is 30-something women! Not us in our 20s! I wonder, again, where does that put the young women who have given up their decade of liberation and sexual freedom to wear “man-distancing” slings and give our breasts over to our babies? What about the young women who devote their lives to monogamy and child-rearing? Does that make us lesser feminists? Less sexual? A disappointment to our foremothers?
I refuse to apologize for not wanting to sleep around. Maybe it’s because women started dating and having sex younger than ever, maybe it’s because sex bombards our culture in every corner, or maybe it’s because we’re more educated now — but, yes, the idea of being promiscuous bores me. And open marriage does not necessarily make a happy marriage — we learned that from your generation, Erica. Maybe jumping from bed to bed would be more exciting if I was told I had to get married young and be sexually conservative. No one wants to be socially confined. But I think we’ve come to realize that we can still feel sexually liberated and choose to do so with only one partner. While raising a family. And breastfeeding. Just because we’re not flaunting it doesn’t mean there isn’t passion behind our locked doors.
Do I think women have the right to be sexually free? Absolutely. But I also believe we should have a choice about how we want to use our bodies and live our lives without being attacked. And that choice is what feminism is really about.
What do you think? Are more young women “over” sex? Does young motherhood strip away our sexuality too soon? Or does Erica have it all wrong?
23 Comments to Sex and Feminism. Where Do We Fit?
Andrea
July 12, 2011 at 4:13 pm
Over sex?!?! I had my babies at 20,22, and 24. I’ve had my foster babies at 27, 28, and 29. My sexuality is alive and well. And the few pounds of weight I’m still holding on to, well they went to my boobs. I feel sexier than ever. (most of the time)
michellehorton
July 12, 2011 at 4:19 pm
Good for you, Andrea!!! But according to Erica, if you aren’t in an open marriage and being sexually “free” then you must be over sex. Because monogamy is boring, naturally. And I’m glad to see you disregard the parenting = no sex myth. It’s so annoying and completely untrue for every generation.
julie/just precious
July 12, 2011 at 4:24 pm
ugh. so annoying. There is ABSOLUTELY nothing wrong with monogamy. NOTHING. Shame on people who play it off as if it’s uncool.
emeeks
July 12, 2011 at 4:48 pm
I belong to a conservative religion and chose the “old fashioned” approach to marriage and sex. Articles like this kind of piss me off because it seems to preclude that because I chose a non politically correct path that I must be unhappy. I think that women have a right to choose–and this includes the choice to wait until I get married to have sex.
Related to questions about feminism and motherhood is Kathy Dettwyler’s article “Is Breastfeeding Advocacy Anti-Feminist?” At one point she said:
“Within mainstream US culture, the traditional (pre-feminist) cultural construction of the biological differences between the sexes, and therefore the proper roles for men and women in society, had two basic premises. First: “Women can’t do the things men do because all women are (a) Too weak (physical limitations, especially strength); (b) Too stupid (cognitive limitations, especially for science/math); and (c) Morally deficient (too emotional, not rational).” Second: “Only the things that men do are important: productive activities in the public sphere.” A corollary of the second premise is that the things that men specifically can’t do because of their biology – menstruating, conceiving, gestating, birthing, and lactating – are unimportant. These reproductive activities are part of the private, domestic sphere; they are ‘taken for granted’ as being what women do since they aren’t capable of achieving in the men’s world of true/real accomplishments.”
She then goes on to discuss how many modern feminists have attacked the first idea, and rightfully so, making much headway in what women can participate in society. Many of these same feminists, however, accept lock, stock and barrel the second supposition–that things men can’t do are unimportant. That only participating in the public sphere like men do is important. She questions this assumption from an evolutionary perspective (where only reproductive fitness matters–the more children you have the more fit you are, and thus women who don’t reproduce are evolutionarily non-factors) and with a cultural feminist approach. I found it a fascinating discussion on how women can be mothers and feminists at the same time. It matches my feelings that women should genuinely be able to choose the path that they want.
tracyanne
July 12, 2011 at 5:19 pm
I believe that we are not over sex, some of us have just seen the errors of our past generations ways. We as women are coming back to what’s right. Loving our husbands and children the way God meant it to be. We traveled way too far from what it means to be a woman. We were made to be mothers and wives. Yes, we were held down a bit to much in the past and this caused these last few generations of being “free” but look at our parents! Many are single mothers barely making it, divorced, alcoholic, or just plain unhappily married. I’m 26, married over three years now with a 14 month old, She breastfeeds, co-sleeps, and is worn in a “in a man-distancing sling” My husband even wears that sling, so what is it called then? We have a happy marriage with sex as often as we want. How else are babies made? We would have more if I didn’t use that birth control I’m supposedly giving up the right to. Just because I don’t feel that I need to sleep around before or after being married does not mean that I’m “over sex” And in my opinion look at what that “freedom” is giving us. This freedom is so clearly being expressed still by younger and younger children and causing them to have babies because they saw their mothers with such “freedom”. We have passed it down to our children, some younger than 12! I think that would cause our grandmothers to be disappointed! Erica Jong just because you burned your bra doesn’t mean the rest of us should follow in your footsteps causing the same pain on our future generations. I believe this is showing the exact opposite of what feminism should be.
tracyanne
July 12, 2011 at 5:21 pm
Very well said!!!!
Sara
July 12, 2011 at 5:21 pm
Umm, I think my five children (and the two we lost) are a testament to the fact that my sex life is flourishing and no where near ‘over’. And I know my husband has no complaints about all the breastfeeding. =)
personally, I find monogamy much more exciting (hello? It’s all mine!) and yes, MUCH safer.
emeeks
July 12, 2011 at 5:28 pm
I forgot to post the link to her article, sorry.
http://www.lactivistleanings.com/education/is-breastfeeding-advocacy-anti-feminist-an-essay-by-katherine-a-dettwyler/
Jenny Haller
July 12, 2011 at 6:04 pm
I am so much more of a feminist now that I am a mother of two [girls at that]… and especially after giving birth naturally and breast feeding. I realize my power, strength and voice as a woman. And as empowering as labor was, it made me feel even more ‘in touch’ with my sexuality and I feel (at 26) about to enter an even more passionate sexual prime.
Guess who else joins me in my feminist theories [and loves my powerfully sexy body]? My monogamous husband.
Christina
July 12, 2011 at 6:44 pm
I think that sometime the big advocates of feminisim in our mothers age and older sometime were so extreme that they forgot that most men desire to settle down, raise a family and be monogmous too. So if men and women- being not only equal but allowing them to be identical to eachother, are allowed to have free roaming sex until they decide to settle down and find a family, then why does it mean a women cant desire the same thing? Why does that make us lower if we decide that we want a family-when ever we want it? That is one thing with some (note i said some) feminist that are really extreme seem to put men in a catagory that i find alot of men never want to be. the goal for women was to be this goddess of sexual conquest to get back at men, but i see a whole sea of men that dont want to be “sexually liberated” either. So if some men want it, and some women want it- they can chose to have it. But my husband didnt, and found a woman (me) that didnt want that either and we have a beautiful family. I think that this choice is made out of as much freedom and liberation as anyone elses choice could be.
jenna
July 12, 2011 at 6:53 pm
This is crazy! I am proud to say I am 25 , married, with 2 kids, and have wonderful sex with my husband and only my husband and we have a very healthy, happy marriage and life! And how about a pat on the back to all those who are the same or who are being safe about their sexual choices! And not running around telling every Joe on the street who they sleep with! I agree with you 100% Michelle!
mattie
July 12, 2011 at 7:09 pm
this is really interesting. i think of myself as a feminist, but i’m kind of sick of feminism always being about sexual liberation. there are so many other aspects of feminism that i’m drawn to. i’m pregnant with my first daughter and i’m going to be sure to teach her that she doesn’t have to sleep around to have the same rights as men (that argument doesn’t even make sense to me–if anything, it makes women more vulnerable to men. it makes them dependent on their sexuality to get what they want). i think there are serious consequences to having multiple, flippant sexual relationships. i find it sexy knowing that my husband has never had another sexual partner and that he doesn’t ever plan on having another besides me unless i die or something. i like knowing that i’m so important to him that he would never share an intimate moment with another woman because i fulfill his wants and needs. it challenges me and definitely makes me want to keep things interesting! people with open relationships can tell you they’re happy, but really? i don’t know how there would be serious jealousy issues.
Chaunie Brusie
July 12, 2011 at 8:09 pm
“Man-distracting sling…” WOW. I wonder if she sees the irony in her argument of so-called feminism when she is describing everything about women in relation to her attraction to men. Ironic, much?
Tara
July 12, 2011 at 9:08 pm
I find this woman’s opinion insulting! I am more than happy with the life I have CHOSEN to live! Why do I want to sleep around with God only knows who? My husband and I are in a committed and healthy relationship. I don’t see why sleeping around would be more fulfilling. I can’t wait to start raising our soon-to-be-born daughter! I don’t think this makes me any less of a woman!
Tara
July 12, 2011 at 9:14 pm
I completely agree!!! Since when does sleeping around make you a feminist? If anything, I wish I could go back to my more “promiscuous” days and make some better choices. I plan to teach my daughter than she can be a strong woman WITHOUT having to sleep around of have sex to get a man’s attention! I hope she will make the choices that make her a strong-willed, powerful, confident woman!
Tara
July 12, 2011 at 9:25 pm
Seriously!! Her idea of being liberated is making men want you- and then giving them what they want… I don’t get it!
Jessi
July 13, 2011 at 12:05 am
I’ve been following your site for a little while now and have often been taken aback by how much you sound like me. I finally decided I just had to comment on this post because I read the same article and had the same reaction. I don’t have kids yet, but I’m a mature, ambitious, well-educated gal…who just so happens to have beat a few of her Mormon friends to the alter. I didn’t get married young because I think monogamy is the only way. I have no problem with people having all the partners they want, in and/or out of marriage if that’s what works for them. BUT. I don’t want to be stuffed into the socially regressive anti-feminist fuddy duddy box just because I happened to fall into a happy monogamous situation at a young age. I made that choice because it worked for me, and I encourage everyone else to choose what works for them. As you so eloquently pointed out, choice is what feminism’s supposed to be all about!
christina
July 13, 2011 at 12:26 am
What I gather from all this is that somehow women are supposed to find their identity and freedom in how much sex they’re having, and getting men to want to have sex with them? I’ve never heard such an insult to women. Where is the feminism here? My husband and I waited until we were married to have sex (we met in college, dated for 3 years and got married at 22 and 23) and we get asked all the time how we have such a good relationship. We are 100% committed to each other physically, emotionally and spiritually. The trust that comes with that commitment is integral to our kids’ well-being and their ability to grow into confident, responsible adults. Neither of us has ever had a sexual relationship with anyone else and we have an incredibly happy and healthy marriage and couldn’t be happier with our lives. I’d be willing to bet that I feel much more “free” than my counterparts who have had a slew of sexual partners with no commitment. My big question is why there is this idea that monogamy and marriage are negative things that trap women into a life they don’t want to lead? Marriage and monogamy are both wonderful things and are the foundation of society. I’m proud of our generation for recognizing that and making that choice independently.
michellehorton
July 13, 2011 at 1:31 am
It seems that her logic is that because women are choosing monogamy (and breastfeeding, apparently, which was a weird attack on mothers), they must be “over” sex, and if we’re “over” sex, then we must not want birth control or abortions, which will then reverse the entire feminism movement. The logic in that is so flimsy it’s baffling. I understand that women in her era did feel “trapped” because they didn’t have options, but that doesn’t mean that all monogamous relationships are negative. She lives in this world where sex — as much of it as possible — rules our lives. I’m glad to see I’m not the only one who found her remarks shocking for reasons OTHER than what the media was saying: That 30-somethings are monogamous, but 20-somethings are still as sexually liberated as ever.
michellehorton
July 13, 2011 at 1:32 am
Thanks, Jessi! That’s so nice to hear. It’s always nice to find like-minded people.
mattie
July 13, 2011 at 4:14 pm
i forgot to mention in my comment that i am really confused about why our generation being “over” sex will lead to lack of birth control. i’m in a monogamous marriage, and that is definitely one thing i’ll fight for if it comes to that. my family situation would be really different if i didn’t have access to birth control…kids coming out our ears! not that that would be a bad thing necessarily, but it would really take a toll on me and my marriage.
stacy h
July 15, 2011 at 6:31 pm
she just likes to stir the pot. yet another erica jong fail.
website
May 30, 2012 at 9:48 pm
Cool post . Thanks for, posting on this blog mate. Ill message you soon. I did not know that!