Tended to be studied only as the background condition of other phenomena
April 2, 2025 12:11 AM Subscribe
“Yes!” Ward said, banging her hand on a desk. “Because this shit happens over and over and over, with every generation. Every generation of women has their epiphanic moment where they realize this shit is not worth it. Every generation of women has the icon who burns all the man’s stuff. And so part of the tragedy is we don’t learn.” from If Hetero Relationships Are So Bad, Why Do Women Go Back for More? [The Cut; ungated]
Really interesting article; thanks for sharing. I learned some new terms, for one thing.
posted by brainwane at 2:02 AM on April 2 [4 favorites]
posted by brainwane at 2:02 AM on April 2 [4 favorites]
Said it before, and I'll say it again: Valerie Solanas did nothing wrong.
I’m not going to feign moral outrage here but come on, what Valerie Solanas wrote is one thing, what she is infamous for doing is shooting two gay men, one over small grievances and the other fully an innocent bystander. Not sure how much trenchant critique of heterosexuality is contained within that act.
posted by atoxyl at 2:09 AM on April 2 [26 favorites]
I’m not going to feign moral outrage here but come on, what Valerie Solanas wrote is one thing, what she is infamous for doing is shooting two gay men, one over small grievances and the other fully an innocent bystander. Not sure how much trenchant critique of heterosexuality is contained within that act.
posted by atoxyl at 2:09 AM on April 2 [26 favorites]
I can't help but think that this whole article confuses a sexual orientation with societal gender roles. Those are two separate things. This isn't about "heterosexuality", it's about patriarchy, and I think that confusing the two terms is a big mistake.
Also, a straight woman can no more "change" to seeking same-sex relationships than a gay person can be "changed" by conversion therapy, so I think that answers the question about "why do women go back for more hetero relationships" - if that's how you're wired, then...yeah.
posted by EmpressCallipygos at 3:35 AM on April 2 [49 favorites]
Also, a straight woman can no more "change" to seeking same-sex relationships than a gay person can be "changed" by conversion therapy, so I think that answers the question about "why do women go back for more hetero relationships" - if that's how you're wired, then...yeah.
posted by EmpressCallipygos at 3:35 AM on April 2 [49 favorites]
Some commentary on this from Lux Alptraum's The B+ Squad on Patreon: Compcomphet.
"I'm not saying that there isn't some vast conspiracy to suppress female sexual desire. Obviously there is. But I think that women are capable of knowing if they are straight."
posted by What is E. T. short for? at 4:12 AM on April 2 [12 favorites]
"I'm not saying that there isn't some vast conspiracy to suppress female sexual desire. Obviously there is. But I think that women are capable of knowing if they are straight."
posted by What is E. T. short for? at 4:12 AM on April 2 [12 favorites]
Riffing off EmpressCallipygos: One of the lasting, if far from urgent, questions I still have about my asexuality is whether it represents a change in orientation for me. Was I always this way?
I still don't know. Partly it's hard to know because I've had so few relationships. One in high school, one brief freshman-year one that ended when it became clear to him that he was not getting in my pants, then the man I dated and LDRed with for three years until we moved in together for another three years before marrying for twenty and then divorcing. I tried the apps for a while, fruitlessly.
I'm quite comfortable being adamant about never wanting partnered sex again. What I still can't say is how much of that is due to going all the way off sex during that marriage, partly owing to having been cast as his mommy and bankroll and stuffie (all of which is deeply unsexy), partly due to pressure for sex from him becoming more and more unwanted and unpleasant. (If anyone's read Bujold -- I wasn't Ekaterin, but yeah, some things about her situation rhyme.) It's enough to suggest my orientation changed, not enough to prove it; I can also read myself as lifelong demi or gray-ace.
So while I'm fully onboard with "women know their orientations," I'm unwilling to say "women's orientations never change." And, of course, I see no reason to limit that to women.
posted by humbug at 4:41 AM on April 2 [10 favorites]
I still don't know. Partly it's hard to know because I've had so few relationships. One in high school, one brief freshman-year one that ended when it became clear to him that he was not getting in my pants, then the man I dated and LDRed with for three years until we moved in together for another three years before marrying for twenty and then divorcing. I tried the apps for a while, fruitlessly.
I'm quite comfortable being adamant about never wanting partnered sex again. What I still can't say is how much of that is due to going all the way off sex during that marriage, partly owing to having been cast as his mommy and bankroll and stuffie (all of which is deeply unsexy), partly due to pressure for sex from him becoming more and more unwanted and unpleasant. (If anyone's read Bujold -- I wasn't Ekaterin, but yeah, some things about her situation rhyme.) It's enough to suggest my orientation changed, not enough to prove it; I can also read myself as lifelong demi or gray-ace.
So while I'm fully onboard with "women know their orientations," I'm unwilling to say "women's orientations never change." And, of course, I see no reason to limit that to women.
posted by humbug at 4:41 AM on April 2 [10 favorites]
Almost the whole of behavioural genetics, most art, and lots of economics talks about heterosexuality constantly. This whole "aha! Let us critically study heterosexuality, no-one does that!" is nonsense.
What women don't like is what they say: men are motivated by sex, women do the childcare, women gatekeep sex, men like younger women, and so on. Actually, the manosphere doesn't like what they say either: women have sexual preferences and are not interested in you. Sucks to be human. Be lucky in your life partner, it's really important.
posted by bluemat at 5:25 AM on April 2 [3 favorites]
What women don't like is what they say: men are motivated by sex, women do the childcare, women gatekeep sex, men like younger women, and so on. Actually, the manosphere doesn't like what they say either: women have sexual preferences and are not interested in you. Sucks to be human. Be lucky in your life partner, it's really important.
posted by bluemat at 5:25 AM on April 2 [3 favorites]
I had thoughts, many of which have been expressed by other commenters quite well, and then I got to the bottom of the archive version, where the next article up is "Buckle up as Neptune moves into Aries", and was like oh that explains why I had thoughts.
I have students, and the problem really is patriarchy, in its neo- form where a firehose of exquisitely designed right-wing propaganda persuades a hugely dominant chunk of the straight boys that being anything other than a juvenile douchebag renders you Not A Man. The straight women (that is, the hugely dominant chunk of the women) are in despair at their four choices: competing like hell over the few straight men who aren't like this, staying single and being lonely, horny and frustrated, resigning themselves to being a bangmaid whose boyfriend listens to Rogan, or doing what the professor in the article appears to suggest, which is dating a woman for a better relationship, but they're hetero and this almost never works out.
The solution is to go after the firehose of propaganda, but wow is that ever well-funded. Now strap in as Uranus moves into Virgo.
posted by outgrown_hobnail at 5:34 AM on April 2 [19 favorites]
I have students, and the problem really is patriarchy, in its neo- form where a firehose of exquisitely designed right-wing propaganda persuades a hugely dominant chunk of the straight boys that being anything other than a juvenile douchebag renders you Not A Man. The straight women (that is, the hugely dominant chunk of the women) are in despair at their four choices: competing like hell over the few straight men who aren't like this, staying single and being lonely, horny and frustrated, resigning themselves to being a bangmaid whose boyfriend listens to Rogan, or doing what the professor in the article appears to suggest, which is dating a woman for a better relationship, but they're hetero and this almost never works out.
The solution is to go after the firehose of propaganda, but wow is that ever well-funded. Now strap in as Uranus moves into Virgo.
posted by outgrown_hobnail at 5:34 AM on April 2 [19 favorites]
I agree with what others have said here, but also wanted to bring up this part from that The B+ Squad link posted earlier:
And the more I read about Valerie Solanas, the more I'm convinced that if she were around today she'd be just another terf.
posted by AlSweigart at 6:12 AM on April 2 [5 favorites]
I find that very question exhausting. I find it even more so because it is essentially a click-baity repackaging of Ward's musing that women "are straight by cultural default and not out of true desire."Emphasis mine. It is The Cut after all.
And the more I read about Valerie Solanas, the more I'm convinced that if she were around today she'd be just another terf.
posted by AlSweigart at 6:12 AM on April 2 [5 favorites]
I think that when talking about changing for straight women (or straight people in general honestly) what is important to remember is that straight is the norm, there is no thought that needs to go into being straight. One can go their entire life without even thinking about the fact that they are straight, and what that means. So maybe change wasn't the best word, but what I am thinking of is more like experiment, or trying it if that makes sense. I might be misunderstanding, but that is what I was thinking. Can you really even say you're straight if you have experimented?
posted by eggy at 6:37 AM on April 2 [3 favorites]
posted by eggy at 6:37 AM on April 2 [3 favorites]
Also, why in the world is heterosexuality described as a "perceived norm"? Is there some doubt in the author's mind that most people are straight?
posted by Mr.Know-it-some at 6:39 AM on April 2 [2 favorites]
posted by Mr.Know-it-some at 6:39 AM on April 2 [2 favorites]
One can go their entire life without even thinking about the fact that they are straight
Say what? I can remember very clearly the moment in fifth grade when I suddenly started seeing girls in a totally different light. That was in 1978. Believe me, I thought about the fact that I'm straight an awful lot in the ensuing decades.
If what you mean is "one can go their entire life without even thinking about what it means that being hetero is the default and what that might mean for someone who isn't totally hetero", then yeah, sure.
posted by outgrown_hobnail at 6:47 AM on April 2 [4 favorites]
Say what? I can remember very clearly the moment in fifth grade when I suddenly started seeing girls in a totally different light. That was in 1978. Believe me, I thought about the fact that I'm straight an awful lot in the ensuing decades.
If what you mean is "one can go their entire life without even thinking about what it means that being hetero is the default and what that might mean for someone who isn't totally hetero", then yeah, sure.
posted by outgrown_hobnail at 6:47 AM on April 2 [4 favorites]
"perceived norm"?
I think there's this thing where queer people hold out hope that most of the world is actually/secretly queer or something, and they're all just held back by circumstance. I don't get it, really. It feels like cope.
posted by june_dodecahedron at 6:49 AM on April 2 [7 favorites]
I think there's this thing where queer people hold out hope that most of the world is actually/secretly queer or something, and they're all just held back by circumstance. I don't get it, really. It feels like cope.
posted by june_dodecahedron at 6:49 AM on April 2 [7 favorites]
Also, why in the world is heterosexuality described as a "perceived norm"? Is there some doubt in the author's mind that most people are straight?
In my experience, many (most?) people are at least somewhat fluid in their sexual attraction; assuming there are about as many “exclusively heterosexual” people as “exclusively homosexual” people, the dominance of heterosexuality has to be a construct driven by societal pressures. If kids were raised with the overwhelming message that they might love anyone, we might see a very different societal distribution. Of course, that experiment is… impractical.
Heterosexual people are very resistant to the message that they aren’t “natural” but just part of a distribution with no more moral force than any other factor.
posted by GenjiandProust at 7:16 AM on April 2 [14 favorites]
In my experience, many (most?) people are at least somewhat fluid in their sexual attraction; assuming there are about as many “exclusively heterosexual” people as “exclusively homosexual” people, the dominance of heterosexuality has to be a construct driven by societal pressures. If kids were raised with the overwhelming message that they might love anyone, we might see a very different societal distribution. Of course, that experiment is… impractical.
Heterosexual people are very resistant to the message that they aren’t “natural” but just part of a distribution with no more moral force than any other factor.
posted by GenjiandProust at 7:16 AM on April 2 [14 favorites]
This feels more performative than anything else, but sometimes being performative is the best way to get people thinking about things in new ways and questioning their assumptions. I tend to agree with the folks here raising the point that patriarchy is a better framework for understanding much of what goes wrong in many hetero relationships, but I appreciate people thinking about these things from a wide variety of perspectives.
One point that does concern me slightly though is that the ideas here may run uncomfortably close to the idea that homogeneity and segregation improve society, which is a line of thinking that deserves no support.
posted by Pemdas at 7:18 AM on April 2 [4 favorites]
One point that does concern me slightly though is that the ideas here may run uncomfortably close to the idea that homogeneity and segregation improve society, which is a line of thinking that deserves no support.
posted by Pemdas at 7:18 AM on April 2 [4 favorites]
assuming there are about as many “exclusively heterosexual” people as “exclusively homosexual” people
That's a big assumption. Do you have any scientific support for it?
posted by outgrown_hobnail at 7:20 AM on April 2 [2 favorites]
That's a big assumption. Do you have any scientific support for it?
posted by outgrown_hobnail at 7:20 AM on April 2 [2 favorites]
Is there some doubt in the author's mind that most people are straight?
I mean, there's some in mine, but as june_dodecahedron says, that's probably cope.
I know a lot of men who have said, out loud, "I'm straight, but..." [Tom Hardy, David Bowie, and Cillian Murphy are popular ways to end this sentence], and lot of women who have said, also out loud, "I'm straight, but..." [this sentence ends with Natalie Portman, Keira Knightley, or both, a genuinely shocking amount of the time].
Anecdotally, the women are more likely to finish up with 'so maybe I'm a tiny bit bi, so what' and the men are more likely to finish up with 'but that doesn't mean anything', despite otherwise having said exactly the same thing.
It depends what you mean by bisexual. If anything other than strict Kinsey 0.0 or 6.0 is bisexual, then yes, if you have ever had one fleeting moment of sexual attraction to someone of the same gender as you, you are bisexual. I think that's bullshit, myself, I think 2-4 is the 'bisexual band' and 1 and 5 are basically straight and gay people who got way too drunk one time. But it's a definition that's out there.
posted by ngaiotonga at 7:21 AM on April 2 [6 favorites]
I mean, there's some in mine, but as june_dodecahedron says, that's probably cope.
I know a lot of men who have said, out loud, "I'm straight, but..." [Tom Hardy, David Bowie, and Cillian Murphy are popular ways to end this sentence], and lot of women who have said, also out loud, "I'm straight, but..." [this sentence ends with Natalie Portman, Keira Knightley, or both, a genuinely shocking amount of the time].
Anecdotally, the women are more likely to finish up with 'so maybe I'm a tiny bit bi, so what' and the men are more likely to finish up with 'but that doesn't mean anything', despite otherwise having said exactly the same thing.
It depends what you mean by bisexual. If anything other than strict Kinsey 0.0 or 6.0 is bisexual, then yes, if you have ever had one fleeting moment of sexual attraction to someone of the same gender as you, you are bisexual. I think that's bullshit, myself, I think 2-4 is the 'bisexual band' and 1 and 5 are basically straight and gay people who got way too drunk one time. But it's a definition that's out there.
posted by ngaiotonga at 7:21 AM on April 2 [6 favorites]
> assuming there are about as many “exclusively heterosexual” people as “exclusively homosexual” people
That's a big assumption. Do you have any scientific support for it?
Nope, not my area of research. But, do you have any scientific proof of the reverse? Most people identify as heterosexual, sure, but the article is asking (at least in part) if that’s innate or societally driven.
There’s absolutely no doubt that heterosexual men, as a class, are not a great thing for heterosexual women or society in general.
posted by GenjiandProust at 7:30 AM on April 2 [8 favorites]
That's a big assumption. Do you have any scientific support for it?
Nope, not my area of research. But, do you have any scientific proof of the reverse? Most people identify as heterosexual, sure, but the article is asking (at least in part) if that’s innate or societally driven.
There’s absolutely no doubt that heterosexual men, as a class, are not a great thing for heterosexual women or society in general.
posted by GenjiandProust at 7:30 AM on April 2 [8 favorites]
Nope, not my area of research. But, do you have any scientific proof of the reverse?
Never mind.
posted by outgrown_hobnail at 7:39 AM on April 2 [1 favorite]
Never mind.
posted by outgrown_hobnail at 7:39 AM on April 2 [1 favorite]
Also, a straight woman can no more "change" to seeking same-sex relationships than a gay person can be "changed" by conversion therapy, so I think that answers the question about "why do women go back for more hetero relationships" - if that's how you're wired, then...yeah.
I don't think Ward hangs with that idea: "Ward explained that she has long argued that sexuality is more of a choice than modern society generally admits. She also believes that women specifically — many more than we would think — are straight by cultural default and not out of true desire."
I am all for the full interrogation of heterosexuality and patriarchy obviously as the structures that have been built around them are clearly, visibly unhealthy. But this rhetoric just reminds me of the radfem blogosphere from the early aughts, and we saw where that ended up. I don't think Ward is quite as deeply steeped in the same gender essentialism but I'm not super familiar with her work.
Mostly it just seems inaccurate to declare that women aren't truly straight because they have difficulty articulating why. First, as noted at length above, it's the cultural default. Straight women have not had to consciously think about the whys. Ward thinks they must have because SHE did, without recognizing that her experience is non-universal and also that it's possible her existing attraction to women meant she was not having a "straight" woman's experience at all.
Second, women are not socialized to articulate their desire the way men are -- I could write a paean to my fully Kinsey-0 hetero desire but I have, perversely, been told that it's gross to be sexually attracted to men (typically by the same folks who told me it was also mandatory). Small wonder that when having this question sprung upon them, straight women might struggle to respond.
posted by We put our faith in Blast Hardcheese at 7:44 AM on April 2 [12 favorites]
I don't think Ward hangs with that idea: "Ward explained that she has long argued that sexuality is more of a choice than modern society generally admits. She also believes that women specifically — many more than we would think — are straight by cultural default and not out of true desire."
I am all for the full interrogation of heterosexuality and patriarchy obviously as the structures that have been built around them are clearly, visibly unhealthy. But this rhetoric just reminds me of the radfem blogosphere from the early aughts, and we saw where that ended up. I don't think Ward is quite as deeply steeped in the same gender essentialism but I'm not super familiar with her work.
Mostly it just seems inaccurate to declare that women aren't truly straight because they have difficulty articulating why. First, as noted at length above, it's the cultural default. Straight women have not had to consciously think about the whys. Ward thinks they must have because SHE did, without recognizing that her experience is non-universal and also that it's possible her existing attraction to women meant she was not having a "straight" woman's experience at all.
Second, women are not socialized to articulate their desire the way men are -- I could write a paean to my fully Kinsey-0 hetero desire but I have, perversely, been told that it's gross to be sexually attracted to men (typically by the same folks who told me it was also mandatory). Small wonder that when having this question sprung upon them, straight women might struggle to respond.
posted by We put our faith in Blast Hardcheese at 7:44 AM on April 2 [12 favorites]
Heterosexual people are very resistant to the message that they aren’t “natural” but just part of a distribution with no more moral force than any other factor.
Perhaps the "moral force" is the issue. I believe that it's a fact that most people, throughout history and culture, are and have been heterosexual, and also that heterosexual attraction is natural, in the sense that it contributes to the propagation of the species. That tells us nothing about the relative moral force of different sexualities.
posted by Mr.Know-it-some at 8:21 AM on April 2 [4 favorites]
Perhaps the "moral force" is the issue. I believe that it's a fact that most people, throughout history and culture, are and have been heterosexual, and also that heterosexual attraction is natural, in the sense that it contributes to the propagation of the species. That tells us nothing about the relative moral force of different sexualities.
posted by Mr.Know-it-some at 8:21 AM on April 2 [4 favorites]
I don't think Ward hangs with that idea: "Ward explained that she has long argued that sexuality is more of a choice than modern society generally admits. She also believes that women specifically — many more than we would think — are straight by cultural default and not out of true desire."
Okay, firstly - sexuality is a continuum, it's not a binary either/or kind of thing. Others upthread have asked "can you really say you're straight if you've experimented with the other side", and both I and Alfred Kinsey would likely say "yes" - if, that is, your experimentations lead you to conclude that "a same sex fling was fun, I guess, but I really prefer the other sex better."
And secondly - I can say that "a same sex one-off was fun, but I really prefer the other gender better" is something I can 100% say that I truly desire, and Ward implying I don't know my own God-damn mind is REALLY some bullshit.
posted by EmpressCallipygos at 8:31 AM on April 2 [10 favorites]
Okay, firstly - sexuality is a continuum, it's not a binary either/or kind of thing. Others upthread have asked "can you really say you're straight if you've experimented with the other side", and both I and Alfred Kinsey would likely say "yes" - if, that is, your experimentations lead you to conclude that "a same sex fling was fun, I guess, but I really prefer the other sex better."
And secondly - I can say that "a same sex one-off was fun, but I really prefer the other gender better" is something I can 100% say that I truly desire, and Ward implying I don't know my own God-damn mind is REALLY some bullshit.
posted by EmpressCallipygos at 8:31 AM on April 2 [10 favorites]
If I could get interested in women's downbelows, I would. Heterosexuality isn't much of a "choice" for us. I do wonder if I'm becoming asexual or mostly asexual because I'm so rarely attracted to anyone, but so far, the unhappy few were men.
posted by jenfullmoon at 8:59 AM on April 2 [3 favorites]
posted by jenfullmoon at 8:59 AM on April 2 [3 favorites]
I could write a paean to my fully Kinsey-0 hetero desire but I have, perversely, been told that it's gross to be sexually attracted to men (typically by the same folks who told me it was also mandatory).
Maybe we need more-subversive raunchy romances. I remember when putting sex in them at all was shocking and subversive. Now I get sad when even the authors who aren’t writing deeply inegalitarian relationships have to put in a fortune to make enough freedom for *two* adults to have some.
Realism sometimes gets you Villette, which I love but…
posted by clew at 9:00 AM on April 2 [3 favorites]
Maybe we need more-subversive raunchy romances. I remember when putting sex in them at all was shocking and subversive. Now I get sad when even the authors who aren’t writing deeply inegalitarian relationships have to put in a fortune to make enough freedom for *two* adults to have some.
Realism sometimes gets you Villette, which I love but…
posted by clew at 9:00 AM on April 2 [3 favorites]
And the more I read about Valerie Solanas, the more I'm convinced that if she were around today she'd be just another terf.
Well Andrea Long Chu found a way to try to reappropriate her, but that’s a very Andrea Long Chu sort of thing to do. Personally I didn’t even mean taking Solanas some level of seriously is behind the pale, just that the original comment came off as an eye-rolling attempt at provocation along the lines of saying “Ted Kaczynski did nothing wrong” when you mean “technology has downsides.”
posted by atoxyl at 9:24 AM on April 2 [4 favorites]
Well Andrea Long Chu found a way to try to reappropriate her, but that’s a very Andrea Long Chu sort of thing to do. Personally I didn’t even mean taking Solanas some level of seriously is behind the pale, just that the original comment came off as an eye-rolling attempt at provocation along the lines of saying “Ted Kaczynski did nothing wrong” when you mean “technology has downsides.”
posted by atoxyl at 9:24 AM on April 2 [4 favorites]
I tried out political lesbianism for a bit in the 90s, but finding men partners was a lot easier than finding women, so it didn't last long. It's certainly not a new concept though.
Pointing out the benefits to women of dating other women may lead to some converts, but I'm not convinced that most women who currently identify as straight would enjoy sex with women. Broaden the conversation to include less romance-centric relationship possibilities. You can live alone while still having serious relationships, partner with a woman to raise children while seeing a boyfriend on the side, etc. Merging life partnership with sex and romance has real downsides.
posted by metasarah at 9:27 AM on April 2 [9 favorites]
Pointing out the benefits to women of dating other women may lead to some converts, but I'm not convinced that most women who currently identify as straight would enjoy sex with women. Broaden the conversation to include less romance-centric relationship possibilities. You can live alone while still having serious relationships, partner with a woman to raise children while seeing a boyfriend on the side, etc. Merging life partnership with sex and romance has real downsides.
posted by metasarah at 9:27 AM on April 2 [9 favorites]
Heterosexual Studies is a clever script-flip and I’m mostly here for it. Those of us with a strong investment in heterosexual monogamy might welcome some of her insights. But we’re all on thin ice when we start accusing each other of false consciousness.
posted by ducky l'orange at 9:54 AM on April 2 [9 favorites]
posted by ducky l'orange at 9:54 AM on April 2 [9 favorites]
Quoting from the article:
This of course still left the question: What about “real” heterosexual women? It seemed fair to assume that they exist. “Ultimately, the way I will measure success is not whether all of these young women become lesbians,” Ward said, laughing. Navigating the structural problems of heterosexuality could “look like choosing to partner with women,” or it could “look like telling your husband, ‘You are going to have to do your part.’” The structure itself would only ever change, she said, if a critical mass of women chose one or the other — or both.
Ward does not think your particular, specific heterosexuality is false, or that you, specifically don’t know your own mind. I understand the defensiveness but imo it’s misplaced.
She also is very aware of patriarchy’s role in this. “Really you should be talking about patriarchy” feels like telling someone teaching a class on the history of labor movements “you really should be teaching about capitalism”. Classes and books often take as their subject a smaller piece of our world in order to explore larger systems.
posted by wemayfreeze at 10:20 AM on April 2 [9 favorites]
This of course still left the question: What about “real” heterosexual women? It seemed fair to assume that they exist. “Ultimately, the way I will measure success is not whether all of these young women become lesbians,” Ward said, laughing. Navigating the structural problems of heterosexuality could “look like choosing to partner with women,” or it could “look like telling your husband, ‘You are going to have to do your part.’” The structure itself would only ever change, she said, if a critical mass of women chose one or the other — or both.
Ward does not think your particular, specific heterosexuality is false, or that you, specifically don’t know your own mind. I understand the defensiveness but imo it’s misplaced.
She also is very aware of patriarchy’s role in this. “Really you should be talking about patriarchy” feels like telling someone teaching a class on the history of labor movements “you really should be teaching about capitalism”. Classes and books often take as their subject a smaller piece of our world in order to explore larger systems.
posted by wemayfreeze at 10:20 AM on April 2 [9 favorites]
But we’re all on thin ice when we start accusing each other of false consciousness.
^ this. The constant "you don't like what you think you like" was what drove me away from those aforementioned radical feminist blogs back in the day. Admittedly, bullet dodged, but still.
Interrogating your identity, why you like what you like, why you are how you are, is deeply important if we're going to do anything about all of this misery. It just sounds like Ward stops her interrogation right where it's getting interesting -- "why do you like men?" "hmm! good question!" should be the start of the interrogation. Not just jumping to "welp then I guess you don't!"
[EDITED because I left out the quote]
posted by We put our faith in Blast Hardcheese at 10:20 AM on April 2 [5 favorites]
^ this. The constant "you don't like what you think you like" was what drove me away from those aforementioned radical feminist blogs back in the day. Admittedly, bullet dodged, but still.
Interrogating your identity, why you like what you like, why you are how you are, is deeply important if we're going to do anything about all of this misery. It just sounds like Ward stops her interrogation right where it's getting interesting -- "why do you like men?" "hmm! good question!" should be the start of the interrogation. Not just jumping to "welp then I guess you don't!"
[EDITED because I left out the quote]
posted by We put our faith in Blast Hardcheese at 10:20 AM on April 2 [5 favorites]
I dunno what to say, I just find dudes hot and don't feel that way about ladies. Whether I can live with a dude long term is a different question, but even if I stayed single I would still be straight.
posted by emjaybee at 10:51 AM on April 2 [5 favorites]
posted by emjaybee at 10:51 AM on April 2 [5 favorites]
Back in grad school i had a stormy fling with a woman who, while she identified as bisexual, was voraciously attracted to men while not actually seeming to like us very much. She would often expound at some length on this point. I once asked her to name something she specifically liked about men. After thinking about it, she said “No matter how much you guys bathe, you always still kind of smell and i think that’s sort of endearing.”
posted by ducky l'orange at 11:03 AM on April 2 [11 favorites]
posted by ducky l'orange at 11:03 AM on April 2 [11 favorites]
The existence throughout history of cultures where bisexuality was considered the default should be a pretty good indicator at how culturally mediated the sexualities of human populations are.
The classic example is a scene in an ancient Greek play where two men are arguing about the relative merits between sex with men vs with women, and the punchline when it’s revealed that one is exclusively homosexual and the other exclusively hetero, which both of which were seen as aberrations.
The other thing that comes to mind is the tremendous amount of men the having relationships with each other in the US Army during the Second World War, and how much effort the postwar reactionaries had to put into erasing this.
Both of these examples concern men, but there’s little reason to believe there’s an appreciable difference in the inherent malleability of sexuality across the spectrum of gender
posted by Jon_Evil at 11:13 AM on April 2 [5 favorites]
The classic example is a scene in an ancient Greek play where two men are arguing about the relative merits between sex with men vs with women, and the punchline when it’s revealed that one is exclusively homosexual and the other exclusively hetero, which both of which were seen as aberrations.
The other thing that comes to mind is the tremendous amount of men the having relationships with each other in the US Army during the Second World War, and how much effort the postwar reactionaries had to put into erasing this.
Both of these examples concern men, but there’s little reason to believe there’s an appreciable difference in the inherent malleability of sexuality across the spectrum of gender
posted by Jon_Evil at 11:13 AM on April 2 [5 favorites]
I think it's unfair to her argument to suggest that she's just saying that straight women are wrong about their own sexuality. The idea that straight women might be encouraged to consider their own sexuality the way queer people have often had to do strikes me as a good one: reflecting on what things have shaped your sexuality, or your expression of your sexuality can generate some good insights about how you choose to approach relationships.
That also seems like a bit of a sidetrack to me. The challenges and dilemmas that exist for heterosexual women (or, more broadly, women in relationships with men) seem to be very real, and having this discussion out of recognition of and sympathy for those challenges strikes me as fruitful.
I did note the irony that the students who take Ward's class are overwhelmingly queer. I think women who are having relationships with men would benefit from having these conversations amongst themselves, and not just in the usual complainy way.
When my kids were young, I hung out with a lot of other stay-at-home (or part-time working) moms of young children, nearly all of whom were straight women in relationships with men (I was a queer woman in a relationship with a queer trans man). A huge proportion of their conversation was complaints about their husbands, a combination of the things the husbands refused to do (change diapers, for instance) and the husbands' lack of understanding about what parenting young children was like—there were a lot of complaints about the condition of the house and/or the failure to have dinner on the table. I believe in venting, but there's also a way that constantly venting about the same things contributes to feeling like "that's just the way things are." If women like those stay-at-home moms began to consider their complaints as not just individual kvetching but systemic problems that could be collectively addressed, that could lead to changes.
I think I just re-invented The Feminine Mystique, there.
Anyway, I want better things for straight women, and if these current conversations can lead to that, I'm all for it.
posted by Well I never at 11:15 AM on April 2 [14 favorites]
That also seems like a bit of a sidetrack to me. The challenges and dilemmas that exist for heterosexual women (or, more broadly, women in relationships with men) seem to be very real, and having this discussion out of recognition of and sympathy for those challenges strikes me as fruitful.
I did note the irony that the students who take Ward's class are overwhelmingly queer. I think women who are having relationships with men would benefit from having these conversations amongst themselves, and not just in the usual complainy way.
When my kids were young, I hung out with a lot of other stay-at-home (or part-time working) moms of young children, nearly all of whom were straight women in relationships with men (I was a queer woman in a relationship with a queer trans man). A huge proportion of their conversation was complaints about their husbands, a combination of the things the husbands refused to do (change diapers, for instance) and the husbands' lack of understanding about what parenting young children was like—there were a lot of complaints about the condition of the house and/or the failure to have dinner on the table. I believe in venting, but there's also a way that constantly venting about the same things contributes to feeling like "that's just the way things are." If women like those stay-at-home moms began to consider their complaints as not just individual kvetching but systemic problems that could be collectively addressed, that could lead to changes.
I think I just re-invented The Feminine Mystique, there.
Anyway, I want better things for straight women, and if these current conversations can lead to that, I'm all for it.
posted by Well I never at 11:15 AM on April 2 [14 favorites]
Well, as an old woman I'm not supposed to have sex anymore, although I'm not dead yet, but I do identify as totally straight. Were my husband to die, I seriously doubt if I would look for any kind of male companionship, mainly because old men who are still looking for a partner are just kind of ewww. Even if it's for serious companionship and not just horny old man bad sex, men of my generation have so much misogynist baggage attached that I doubt if I could handle it.
I gather from talking to women of my age that have tried to enter into heterosexual relationships, sexually active men of my generation fall into two varieties: the horny 90-second kind that doesn't believe in foreplay or the randy old goat that can be pretty amazing in bed--mainly because he's had so much practice--but he'll screw anything that moves. And they both have Opinions on women cooking and picking up their shit. I'll pass.
So once in a while I think of a woman companion and friend. I can imagine hugging and kissing and caring and companionship, but any more just seems...just as unlikely and with all the wrong parts. And not just because of my age.
posted by BlueHorse at 12:00 PM on April 2 [6 favorites]
I gather from talking to women of my age that have tried to enter into heterosexual relationships, sexually active men of my generation fall into two varieties: the horny 90-second kind that doesn't believe in foreplay or the randy old goat that can be pretty amazing in bed--mainly because he's had so much practice--but he'll screw anything that moves. And they both have Opinions on women cooking and picking up their shit. I'll pass.
So once in a while I think of a woman companion and friend. I can imagine hugging and kissing and caring and companionship, but any more just seems...just as unlikely and with all the wrong parts. And not just because of my age.
posted by BlueHorse at 12:00 PM on April 2 [6 favorites]
eggy: "I think that when talking about changing for straight women (or straight people in general honestly) what is important to remember is that straight is the norm, there is no thought that needs to go into being straight. One can go their entire life without even thinking about the fact that they are straight, and what that means. "
It's also worth pointing out that not all queer women are lesbians.
Compulsive heteronormativity hits a lot of women very hard when a) not encouraged to even CONSIDER their straightness b) not entirely put off by dudes c) a lot of decisions getting made around what to do about that in one's younger less-thoughtful years.
I would say in particular for the women of older Gen X, we found ourselves in a similar position to the oldest Boomer men: not knowing there was any kind of road map for an alternative life, so expect to do The Done Thing and just...deal with it. LOTS of my peers' Second Acts have been significantly less straight than their First in various ways, and those of us who didn't have a distinct curtain between the two still have a pretty high rate of "my relationship is fine but I think I might have accidentally lived the wrong life just a little bit".
I am curious how this is - or in the future will be - different in the subsequent generations. Is there a similar flip-rate in Millenials and the oldest Zs now? Didn't they get some of the same CompHet programming we did, or did TV make more difference?
I am certainly on board with the idea that everybody should be given the tools and normalization to interrogate their own sexuality and gender, and not just from a young age but over one's lifetime. Because we don't actually have enough data to know if this changes (we also don't have enough data to define what a "change" is, which is a different problem), but even if it's not "change" as in 'a complete re-alignment of categories' obviously people's interests and energy levels and bodies and trauma and experience levels and available time DOES change a lot in one's life, and might well change priorities in a way that is as meaningful as a complete overhaul.
But that would require science to give more than a single microscopic fuck about women, so.
posted by Lyn Never at 12:56 PM on April 2 [8 favorites]
It's also worth pointing out that not all queer women are lesbians.
Compulsive heteronormativity hits a lot of women very hard when a) not encouraged to even CONSIDER their straightness b) not entirely put off by dudes c) a lot of decisions getting made around what to do about that in one's younger less-thoughtful years.
I would say in particular for the women of older Gen X, we found ourselves in a similar position to the oldest Boomer men: not knowing there was any kind of road map for an alternative life, so expect to do The Done Thing and just...deal with it. LOTS of my peers' Second Acts have been significantly less straight than their First in various ways, and those of us who didn't have a distinct curtain between the two still have a pretty high rate of "my relationship is fine but I think I might have accidentally lived the wrong life just a little bit".
I am curious how this is - or in the future will be - different in the subsequent generations. Is there a similar flip-rate in Millenials and the oldest Zs now? Didn't they get some of the same CompHet programming we did, or did TV make more difference?
I am certainly on board with the idea that everybody should be given the tools and normalization to interrogate their own sexuality and gender, and not just from a young age but over one's lifetime. Because we don't actually have enough data to know if this changes (we also don't have enough data to define what a "change" is, which is a different problem), but even if it's not "change" as in 'a complete re-alignment of categories' obviously people's interests and energy levels and bodies and trauma and experience levels and available time DOES change a lot in one's life, and might well change priorities in a way that is as meaningful as a complete overhaul.
But that would require science to give more than a single microscopic fuck about women, so.
posted by Lyn Never at 12:56 PM on April 2 [8 favorites]
Maybe we need more-subversive raunchy romances
Paging Chuck Tingle, to the white courtesy phone.
posted by supermedusa at 1:11 PM on April 2 [6 favorites]
Paging Chuck Tingle, to the white courtesy phone.
posted by supermedusa at 1:11 PM on April 2 [6 favorites]
Yes-but; I don’t think Tingle is going to catch many of the women who loved Twilight because — this is nearly a direct quote — once you’re married you can’t say no, so it’s nice to imagine that it’s sexy. I think the world also needs a more gradual ramp.
posted by clew at 1:19 PM on April 2 [3 favorites]
posted by clew at 1:19 PM on April 2 [3 favorites]
I haven't seen it pointed out yet, but if you're promoting woman dating woman, keep in mind that women are, y'know, people, and people at best are a grab bag. My mom has been gay my entire life, and her dating choices were catastrophic to her (and her kids') general well-being. Lesbian relationships aren't magical universal bastions of love and acceptance because at the end of the day you're still dating a person, and sometimes people are just full of bees. Does the experience of a lesbian relationship generally trend against the pitfalls of dating dudes? Absolutely! The majority of dudes are fucking up bad! But treating gay relationships as nothing but wonderful is faulty and dangerous. It's still dating, which, gaaah.
posted by Philipschall at 1:32 PM on April 2 [14 favorites]
posted by Philipschall at 1:32 PM on April 2 [14 favorites]
ducky l'orange: "Back in grad school i had a stormy fling with a woman who, while she identified as bisexual, was voraciously attracted to men while not actually seeming to like us very much.”
I think there's a good chunk of men who could/would be the same about women. They want to bang us but don't like us much.
I.... do not know what to comment on that smell remark at all.
posted by jenfullmoon at 1:34 PM on April 2 [6 favorites]
I think there's a good chunk of men who could/would be the same about women. They want to bang us but don't like us much.
I.... do not know what to comment on that smell remark at all.
posted by jenfullmoon at 1:34 PM on April 2 [6 favorites]
Yeah, if I'm truthful (which I try to be), I think Philipschall is on to something -- I'm not any deity's gift to a potential partner either. Part of that is definitely the "not enough experience with different partners to deal with my own rough edges" thing.
Oh well.
posted by humbug at 2:39 PM on April 2 [3 favorites]
Oh well.
posted by humbug at 2:39 PM on April 2 [3 favorites]
I.... do not know what to comment on that smell remark at all.
my mom told me I was a special boy and she said "son if you're going to make smells like that come out of your butt, at least make them loud because people should get fair warning"
posted by ginger.beef at 2:48 PM on April 2 [3 favorites]
my mom told me I was a special boy and she said "son if you're going to make smells like that come out of your butt, at least make them loud because people should get fair warning"
posted by ginger.beef at 2:48 PM on April 2 [3 favorites]
I.... do not know what to comment on that smell remark at all.
I smiled. I think it is a bit true and also a bit endearing to me as well. Like, at our base we are all animals and have smells but maybe the males of our species have more smells, a bit of olfactory sexual dimorphism.
posted by LizBoBiz at 3:39 PM on April 2 [3 favorites]
I smiled. I think it is a bit true and also a bit endearing to me as well. Like, at our base we are all animals and have smells but maybe the males of our species have more smells, a bit of olfactory sexual dimorphism.
posted by LizBoBiz at 3:39 PM on April 2 [3 favorites]
The smell thing makes perfect sense to me. I like people of my own sex for all mutual pursuits up to the horizontal tango. Vertical tango, yes! But they don’t turn me on for actual sex and I think it’s something I smell. Seems like a plausible medium for whatever divides attraction, once we allow everyone to do the actions one might be attracted to (cf. tango).
posted by clew at 5:42 PM on April 2 [3 favorites]
posted by clew at 5:42 PM on April 2 [3 favorites]
Also echoing Philipschall... does anyone have statistics at hand that actually quantify the health of hetro vs. non-hetero relationships? I was right there with the conventional wisdom that straight men are the primary offenders in long-term relationships and, yeah, everyone likes to complain about housework, but...
> The CDC also stated that 43.8% of lesbian women reported experiencing
> physical violence, stalking, or rape by their partners. The study notes that,
> out of those 43.8%, two thirds (67.4%) reported exclusively female perpetrators.
A quick read of the page that quote is from has me worried that relationships just suck on the whole and that worrying about the gender of those involved is just noise around the edges. Ugh.
posted by eraserbones at 7:37 PM on April 2 [4 favorites]
> The CDC also stated that 43.8% of lesbian women reported experiencing
> physical violence, stalking, or rape by their partners. The study notes that,
> out of those 43.8%, two thirds (67.4%) reported exclusively female perpetrators.
A quick read of the page that quote is from has me worried that relationships just suck on the whole and that worrying about the gender of those involved is just noise around the edges. Ugh.
posted by eraserbones at 7:37 PM on April 2 [4 favorites]
I once read an account of an actual lesbian who found herself in a community of political lesbians. It was really frustrating because most of the political lesbians didn't want to have sex with women because they weren't... attracted to women.
I have no idea how the numbers will shake out. I'm sure there are some potentially bisexual people who may have identified as heterosexual because bisexual wasn't available to them as a category. I know that there are at least some because I've met them. But I've also met completely absolutely heterosexual people who would be just fine with experiencing same-sex attraction as well - but they just aren't wired that way.
If you love lesbians and other queer women, don't try to get straight women to be queer. They were born that way and that's awesome for them, just like being queer is awesome for those of us who are.
posted by jb at 7:41 PM on April 2 [5 favorites]
I have no idea how the numbers will shake out. I'm sure there are some potentially bisexual people who may have identified as heterosexual because bisexual wasn't available to them as a category. I know that there are at least some because I've met them. But I've also met completely absolutely heterosexual people who would be just fine with experiencing same-sex attraction as well - but they just aren't wired that way.
If you love lesbians and other queer women, don't try to get straight women to be queer. They were born that way and that's awesome for them, just like being queer is awesome for those of us who are.
posted by jb at 7:41 PM on April 2 [5 favorites]
one thing the ace community does well as seperate sexual attraction from romantic attraction. that guy who'll happily mess around with his friends but only date women might be a little bit in denial, or he might genuinely be bisexual but heteroromantic. just like gender and biological sex, sexual and romantic attraction often match, but there's no reason they have to.
ward might be conflating the two: perhaps more women are biromantic than realize it, but if they're still sexually straight and sex is a priority for their romantic relationships, dating women isn't gonna work for them (maybe unless they're poly?)
posted by Clowder of bats at 9:27 PM on April 2 [3 favorites]
ward might be conflating the two: perhaps more women are biromantic than realize it, but if they're still sexually straight and sex is a priority for their romantic relationships, dating women isn't gonna work for them (maybe unless they're poly?)
posted by Clowder of bats at 9:27 PM on April 2 [3 favorites]
relationships just suck on the whole
Bingo. If there is any kind of health/happiness differential between queer and straight(-passing) relationships it probably arises from us being more... deliberate(?) about the way we go about relationships, because we're on the margins.
In the supposed utopia of universal queerness that differential would dissappear anyway. And as we've seen above the differential is hardly universal or particularly strong even today. It's mostly a meme.
posted by june_dodecahedron at 12:05 AM on April 3 [6 favorites]
Bingo. If there is any kind of health/happiness differential between queer and straight(-passing) relationships it probably arises from us being more... deliberate(?) about the way we go about relationships, because we're on the margins.
In the supposed utopia of universal queerness that differential would dissappear anyway. And as we've seen above the differential is hardly universal or particularly strong even today. It's mostly a meme.
posted by june_dodecahedron at 12:05 AM on April 3 [6 favorites]
Paging Chuck Tingle, to the white courtesy phone.
Pounded in the Butt by the White Courtesy Phone as a Metaphor for Searching Eternally for the Perfect Partner but They're Seemingly Always Out of Reach
posted by Molesome at 8:02 AM on April 3 [7 favorites]
Pounded in the Butt by the White Courtesy Phone as a Metaphor for Searching Eternally for the Perfect Partner but They're Seemingly Always Out of Reach
posted by Molesome at 8:02 AM on April 3 [7 favorites]
I could write a paean to my fully Kinsey-0 hetero desire but I have, perversely, been told that it's gross to be sexually attracted to men (typically by the same folks who told me it was also mandatory).
Maybe we need more-subversive raunchy romances.
Have you been in the romance aisle recently? There is no lack of raunchy romances, subversive or otherwise. The line between romance and erotica has never been more paper-thin (not complaining).
posted by jb at 2:01 PM on April 3 [2 favorites]
Maybe we need more-subversive raunchy romances.
Have you been in the romance aisle recently? There is no lack of raunchy romances, subversive or otherwise. The line between romance and erotica has never been more paper-thin (not complaining).
posted by jb at 2:01 PM on April 3 [2 favorites]
Missing my point, jb. The romances are very raunchy but not otherwise subversive*. Turns out there was much more than chastity to subvert.
* Tingle an outlier, etc.
posted by clew at 4:53 PM on April 3 [1 favorite]
* Tingle an outlier, etc.
posted by clew at 4:53 PM on April 3 [1 favorite]
Courtney Milan also, though it’s so hard to make plausible that I think her world is hard forked from actual history. And that’s only for a better world in (iirc) one parish, dependent on one benevolent fortune-holder.
On the other hand, the Disastrous Mrs Weldon was real and moderately successful.
posted by clew at 5:55 PM on April 3 [1 favorite]
On the other hand, the Disastrous Mrs Weldon was real and moderately successful.
posted by clew at 5:55 PM on April 3 [1 favorite]
Courtney Milan, KJ Charles, Cat Sebastian, Jordan Hawk, C.J. Polk, A.J. Demas/Alice Degan - lots of subversive romance writers working today. (Okay, Demas/Degan isn't at all explicit, but who else has done a romance with a serious metaphysical twist?)
posted by jb at 7:13 PM on April 3 [2 favorites]
posted by jb at 7:13 PM on April 3 [2 favorites]
So a friend of mine met this dude in a bar off Bumble when we were hanging out on Tuesday. He seemed nice at the time, albeit wearing a Second Amendment shirt, had a lot of tats, gave off redneck vibe. Friend kind of likes that sort of thing. By today it's already over when they got into some argument and he got snitty, but then she was all, "Why his 1.5 years served in jail for a DUI for meth didn't throw me, I don't know...."
Because the pickings are so slim that "DUI FOR METH" didn't throw her. Because that's the options on Bumble. If any guy is single these days, it's probably for bad reasons.
posted by jenfullmoon at 9:03 AM on April 4 [3 favorites]
Because the pickings are so slim that "DUI FOR METH" didn't throw her. Because that's the options on Bumble. If any guy is single these days, it's probably for bad reasons.
posted by jenfullmoon at 9:03 AM on April 4 [3 favorites]
Yeah I've been on record here as being mystified by how the men in my life uh, even manage? Like, so few of them have had steady work. So many of them can't manage a household even of one, much less several. But they have been single! How have they paid rent? How have they not gotten tetanus? They have seemed lost, compared to the women who have generally just sort of kept it movin, picking up the pieces and making it work.
Since getting together with my current partner, though, I'm actually encountering a surfeit of left-wing, feminist, functional and functioning men and it's like ohh okay, they just find each other and travel in packs.
posted by We put our faith in Blast Hardcheese at 10:33 AM on April 4 [6 favorites]
Since getting together with my current partner, though, I'm actually encountering a surfeit of left-wing, feminist, functional and functioning men and it's like ohh okay, they just find each other and travel in packs.
posted by We put our faith in Blast Hardcheese at 10:33 AM on April 4 [6 favorites]
I am popping back in to say that since this thread was posted, I read the book, The Tragedy of Heterosexuality. It's an interesting take: the idea of queer people thinking of themselves as allies to straight people, whose relationships are burdened by gender expectations, by misogyny, by a dominant cultural discourse that men and women aren't quite supposed to actually like each other. As a former women's studies major, a lot of the analysis was familiar to me, and there were occasional bits that made me think, "If I were a straight woman, that would be a bit hard to swallow." But the author does dig right into the phenomenon of some straight women wishing they had alternatives, and she is generally quite sympathetic to both men and women. It's worth a read, if the topic interests you.
posted by Well I never at 10:36 AM on April 6 [6 favorites]
posted by Well I never at 10:36 AM on April 6 [6 favorites]
Thanks for the book review Well I never, that's on the reading list now!
posted by ngaiotonga at 2:05 AM on April 7
posted by ngaiotonga at 2:05 AM on April 7
Ask Dr. Nerdlove: I Haven’t Had A Date In 20 Years. Is It Time For Me To Give Up?
posted by jenfullmoon at 9:56 AM on April 7
posted by jenfullmoon at 9:56 AM on April 7
« Older John Green: Everything Is Tuberculosis | The Black Panther cubs Newer »
posted by prismatic7 at 1:27 AM on April 2 [2 favorites]