I was just reading up on double standards the other day. It was interesting…
Good to get a real-world example. It helps me remember it. Perhaps hypocrisy would be more accurate?
wanders away
Things could be physically the same between the genders, but not psychologically. That is what the skirt analogy was meant to point out.
Why are you allowed to have a psychological hangup about even trying, but she isn’t allowed the same? If she tries it, or even gets close to trying it, and decides she doesn’t like it at all, then are you willing to be with her, even if she tells you nevermore?
For the record, I’ve tried it a few times, and it HURTS, both during and afterwards. I’m not willing to try it again.
The overall psychology between the sexes is different. I think it is more “unusual/weird” for a guy to be penetrated this way than for a girl. And thus, a hangup from the guy is to a higher degree acceptable. In the same way, I think that a girl having a hangup about carrying the guy during intercourse is more acceptable than the other way around.
(This is all for heterosexual couples.)
If she gives it a fair try, and it doesn’t work for her, that is ok with me.
I have tried, I don’t care for it. I am not willing to try again.
I do not like you either, jp.
I’ve tried liver, and didn’t much care for that either.
Now put that in your juice box and suck it, dickface.
<mod>
WARNING
anya marie, I hope you simply forgot what forum you were in.
This is IMHO. That was totally uncalled for here.
</mod>
However, the psychology isn’t the same for all men or all women. Some men are very happy to be penetrated that way, and some women have a hangup. What you’re saying is that YOUR hangup is valid, but a woman’s similar hangup is invalid.
And I don’t think that’s valid, period. If you can claim to be squicked out at the thought of being penetrated anally, it’s only fair that you allow other people-INCLUDING WOMEN-to be similarly squicked out at the same thought.
I think there is a gliding scale.
weirdness/unusualness
less
kiss
[something]
missionary position
[something]
blowjob / cunnilingus
[something]
[something]
female anal penetration
[something]
[something]
male anal penetration
[something]
[something]
more
Most have some point in this scale where they are not willing to do (most of) the stuff below that point. At the same time, we expect out partner to be willing to try things above a certain point. Now, if I expect blowjobs, but am not willing to go down on her, that would be invalid, since they are at the same place on the list. If I expect missionary position, but am not willing to get tied up and spanked, that is valid since the latter is placed lower on the list. In the same way, if I expect her to try female anal sex, but am not willing to try male anal sex, that is valid, since the latter is placed lower.
You seem to think that the “scale” is objective and fixed, but in fact it varies tremendously from person to person: for example, for my group of friends growing up (mid-30s now), oral was MUCH less of a big deal than sex, but for my grandmother, I suspect, that was not true. You have to look at what a particular act means for the person you are with, not what you think it should mean for that gender.
I think part of the reason you are getting such a strong reaction is that there is a certain type of misogynist/anti-gay person who really looks down on people who are penetrated, who look at penetration as the ultimate humiliation. This sort of misogynist will say things like “it’s ok if you are a woman, but never for a man”, but there is this little subtext of “It’s ok if you are ONLY a woman, because you haven’t got any dignity to speak of anyway, but you can’t be a Man if you are ever penetrated.” This is the guy that expects anal and doesn’t see why it’s a big deal, but shudders in horror at the idea of being on the other end. This is the guy that might be afraid of his wife, but never really respects her. I am not saying that you are this guy–I don’t know you at all. I am just saying that this guy exists, that many women have had some sort of contact with him, and that he’s one of the most frustrating types of misogynists to deal with because he believes it’s so obvious that women have no dignity–they are designed to be penetrated, after all–that it doesn’t need to be hardly said. And he assumes everyone agrees with him, deep down.
Again, not saying at all that you are this guy. But I think this is why people are having such a strong reaction here.
Yes, I was actually thinking about that oral sex placement when I wrote the post, since I know that some groups have a much higher placement of that activity. Especially in USA, is my impression. The scale I list is not objective, it is a scale for me / my social cirle / the youth in my country.
But I don’t think that this means that I have to look at how this list is for that particular person. Taken to en extreme, if I had a partner who is from a culture that says that every position other than missionary is way below the line, then that would not be acceptable to me. If this is the case, I’m not saying that she is misguided/selfish or the like, just that her sexuality doesn’t match mine to a sufficient degree.
Basically, you are saying that you are only compatible with someone who has the same order on her list. I suppose that’s fine, but I just think you are really narrow minded with your order and the way you place anal sex for men and women on different positions.
Still, I suppose, if a woman is happy with you and your hangups on the matter, than everyone is happy and no harm done. Just don’t expect me to understand you.