An anonymous emailer writes:
This post relates to a burning question I’ve had and been on a quest to answer for years. I am a sex-positive womyn, and I don’t need research to validate my experience. But, I think the majority of heterosexual women do, and as a feminist I am constantly en garde to set the record, for lack of a better term, straight.If you Google “women sex benefits, women orgasm benefits,” you’ll see a number of articles quoting scientific research on the benefits of “sex” for women. The trouble is, the research never specifies what type of sex, and I believe these articles are use research to further the patriarchal penile- and straight-centric expressions of sex. I happen to enjoy those activities, but to imply that they are the apex of sexual enjoyment or should be the focus of women’s sex for health benefits is journalistically irresponsible.
Regardless, I am confused. Many times the articles don’t cite an actual scientific journal for those of us who find this distinction important. After a careful read of the actions described in the articles which result in the health benefits — e.g., uterine contractions to aid menstrual cramps, an elevated cardiovascular system to decrease stress — it seems to me these articles should actually be retitled “benefits of orgasm” or “benefits of G-spot massage,” neither of which necessarily require a penis or even vaginal penetration. Alternately, does research indicate that item-inserted-into-vagina or penis-ejaculating-in-vagina are the best ways for women to improve their overall health?
I eagerly await your response.
To answer this question, I did in fact Google “sex orgasms women benefits” to see what came up. And it’s true. There is a whole lot of pop culture-y touting of “sex” as having innumerable health benefits for both men and women. Very rarely do these articles say outright that they are talking about penis-in-vagina intercourse, but they certainly don’t go out of their way to include other forms of sex either. This is, of course, symptomatic of our culture’s generally unimaginative perception of what does and does not constitute sex– need I bring up Sr. Clinton’s famous line that delineated this opinion for the whole country?
This, in my mind, is problem number one. It certainly rings of misogyny, but I don’t think this is the whole story, to be honest. I think it is just part and parcel of a cultural confusion and shame about sex, and I think we’re collectively trying to work it all out– some more slowly than others.
Problem #2 is that these articles flip-flop between gushing over the benefits of sex and the benefits of orgasm, sometimes saying one while meaning the other, and sometimes just being altogether confusing. The benefits of sexual activities, arousal, emotional feelings toward a sexual partner, and, yes, orgasm, are many. The benefits the researchers talk about (stress relief, PMS relief for women, prostate health for men, cardiovascular health, etc.) seem to relate directly to the chemicals and hormones released after orgasm. My favorite “benefit” however– and how’s this for catering to the Cosmo-reading crowd– is weight loss. Y’know, from all that humpin’ and bumpin’ you’re doing to get to the orgasm. Hilarious. I’d like to see that workout program as a part of Weight Watchers.
But I digress. The problem here is related to problem #1– the fact that we all (yes, men AND women) seem to correlate dick-in-pussy sex with orgasm. So if we’re talking about sex, we must be talking about intercourse. And if we’re talking about intercourse, then of COURSE that means orgasms for all! Men expect them, women expect them, and everyone is disappointed to find out that life is not in fact like the movies and we all don’t just cum at once like the grand finale of your 4th of July fireworks. Nope. In fact, 30% or fewer women orgasm from intercourse alone, and statistics (sorry, dear anonymous friend, but I can’t find the source at the moment) say that most of those women are probably getting indirect clitoral stimulation at the same time. So why do we have these expectations and stresses and worries when “sex” is supposed to alleviate all of them?? Argh! It’s a language problem, it’s an expectation problem, it’s a lack of communication problem. Oy! So many problems!
Thirdly, and Anonymous did not ask this, but I’m gonna toss it in there for good measure… once you bring the medical-industrial complex into any discussion, they’re going to more or less take over. They become the oracle of credibility, and individual people start to doubt their own experiences. But people seem to want medical validation for their actions… so what do you do? Pleasure for pleasure’s sake is somehow not enough. It has to be the “fountain of youth” or “the new headache pill” or “the weight loss wonder” in order to be a truly justifiable activity. Because… if we’re not being productive then… what? The whole machinery falls apart?
Long story long, I don’t have the answer to all this, but I think it’s something to continue thinking about. Specifically:
1. What’s wrong with pleasure for pleasure’s sake? What if the docs said there was no benefit to orgasm?
2. Why can’t we expand our imaginations to include other lascivious activities in our definition of sex?
3. Does sex mean orgasm? Does orgasm mean sex?
Perhaps, anonymous, these are the questions you are asking, perhaps not. You may be asking if I think these articles have sinister undertones– ones that deliberately serve to oppress women and queers. I’d say no. Perhaps inadvertently, but not deliberately– although even if it is inadvertent, it is still detrimental for everyone. I think that these articles and the demand for them just illuminate a large cross-section of people who are confused about sex, concerned about their health and their futures, and ashamed, on some level, of their desires.
But I could be wrong. Please post your comments!!
~Eden
