Lately, there has been a lot of attention on the “sexual revolution” and the rise in STDs. As I read my timeline full of feminist activists and scope the blogosphere, I can’t help but to ask, “Where is this revolution taking place?” And is anybody accounting for the amount of unprotected sex being had by people of all ages?
I can’t help but to feel blotted out of this “revolution” that’s supposedly going on. Every woman I know is revolutionary in her own right, but not in front of men necessarily. The conversations had by women in the absence of men are the most telling about the nature of this “revolution” and what it means for women of color. I know so many women who are forced to lead double lives because they want to be human and have a chance to get married on day.
When a woman chooses to have sex before marriage, she is still expected to not be sexually active (or too sexually active) outside of the confounds of a committed relationship. To be single is to be waiting. When you don’t wait, you’re desperate and/or a ho, which in this context means black and having more than one too many sexual partners than your love interest can stand.
So many women live double lives – having sex with a team of men, rotating them throughout the week. I myself have some ho tails to share – sexing more than one guy in a week and/or sleeping with a guy for the sole purpose of getting good dick and some decent company. Once I slept with this guy on Day 2 and the only reason why I didn’t go after what I wanted on Day 1 was because of the cardinal rule: NEVER sleep with a guy on the first date if you want to be treated with any level of respect or potentially be in a relationship with him.
Or how about my homegirl who met a Jamaican guy on the street and sexed him in the nearby corner, outside? She loved every minute of it and never saw him again. But she doesn’t tell just anybody about that marvelous experience because she knows that she would be judged horrendously. One friend of mine particularly enjoys threesomes, and double penetration is something she swears by. But this was only told to me in secrecy.
There are plenty of women who have stories that they would never mention in the presence of men; and despite our inner milestones of sexual revelation, I can speak for myself and say that I am still struggling with being all of me in front of a man, hoisms and all. Not to mention, the amount of policing that takes place by other women… As a professional that works with teenagers, the word ho gets tossed around a lot; and despite the bombardment of our youth with sexual images, there is still a very heavy policing of “appropriate sexual behavior” as determined by the standards of their peers. Homosexuals are still bullied everyday.
In adulthood, women are called hoes by the most insecure of women in my opinion, when they merely display sexual human characteristics; and the need to appear as closely to the Virgin Mary as possible is still widespread. There are women who still pride themselves on how long they’ve “held out” from sex despite the fact that they’re already committing fornication by biblical standards.
With the amount of women experiencing sexual disfunction, I can’t push a claim so grandiose as a “sexual revolution”. Yes, I can pursue a guy for sex without being stoned, but I can’t without being placed in the “ho” category. We have now progressed to terms such as “cut buddy” and “trick”. But a woman will curb her number of buddies and tricks based on the men present in the room, in fear of being labeled a jump off. There is no need to get into the double standards that we all know exist. We all experience it everyday. So how then can we call this revolutionary?
While I know more men and women who have dabbled in same – sex pleasures, it doesn’t speak to the rise in anti-gay legislation world wide. It is legal to kill homosexuals in many countries, yet we claim revolutionary status. Resolved, that this sexual revolution is about rich and middle class, heterosexual, white women. While I stand in solidarity with them, I wish the discourse were more inclusive of the diversity of people’s daily lives, realities and set backs.
Yes, I can make my own choices about my sexuality but I must be prepared to live with the consequences of my honesty or live in secrecy, which so many of us do.
So if this revolution is really going on, it’s not going on in my community; and certainly not with any of my friends. I would like to know who named it as such and why they chose the word revolution. Was it to incite such a thing? I certainly hope not because the revolutionaries have always been here, feminist living since the beginning of time. The question is, will others revolutionize themselves to be tolerant of difference?
I don’t think so. Human beings have not arrived at that place yet.