Which witches?
Loosely related to this column…
I’ll admit that I have been obsessing over certain sexual responses lately and the titular line caught my attention.
What is it about the female sexual response that so pre-occupies men? Do women obsess over male orgasm? Do lesbians obsess in the same way regarding their mates? Is it really a solipsistic fascination with male performance? Does it center on the idea of possesion in that men want to “own” women sexually or does it center more on some desire to see women as chaste and actual arousal is percieved as dirty somehow?
In all of these questions I am referring specifically to male “paranoia” and not simple interest in mutual sexual satisfaction in contemporary ideation regarding sexual interaction.
I would have put this in IMHO, but it is directly realted to the linked column, so here it goes.
So, maybe this paranoia doesn’t exist at all…
In women, it takes the shape of suspecting we are not pretty enough. Or too fat. We can become pretty paranoid there.
Men can be paranoid about whether or not it was faked. I think a big part of it is that it’s rare to find men faking it. (Remember that Seinfeld episode where Kramer claims to have faked it, just like Elaine had?)
Did these witches make these claims before or after they were being crushed beneath stones?
Sure, “Enough already! I want to get some sleep.”
But the article indicates that women were put to death because of male paranoia regarding female sexual response. Is this just another of those cases where Unce Cece was reaching a little for a closer and we should just gloss it over with a little Handwavian Brand Twasajoke Spray?
Seems to me that fighting ignorance should not take the form of propagating ersatz history. People take the idea of male sexual insecurity as the cause of misogyny very seriously. If it’s just so much filler for a six hundred word column, I can handle that. But some people think of Cecil as a valid source.
There is plenty of evidence to indicate that human beings have taken the idea of mystical creatures such as demonic incubi and succubi so seriously that they were convinced that people needed to die to deal with the problem.
Is there really a need to differentiate between male and female psychosis to explain that? Is there any substantive basis for the idea that women were put to death because men were paranoid regarding the female orgasm, nocturnal or otherwise?
I don’t see the mystery. Most would consider sexual performance an important part of masculinity, so it would make sense guys would be interested in it. Also, exceptional performance could possibly lead to more mating opportunities from both that partner and others.
Maybe it’s too much to expect that people have read the column in question…
Emphasis mine
I have read feminist literature that discusses male dominance over women taking the form of purposefully denying women sexual pleasure. While I don’t claim to be knowledgeable about topics such as female circumcision, I can’t believe that the idea behind ritually removing the clitoris is to ensure a steady supply of well satisfied sexual partners.
In contemporary society there is a preoccupation with male performance focusing on one’s ability to satisfy a lover. I might very well be missing the point entirely, but I don’t think that medieval theologians were putting women to death as way of ensuring mutual sexual gratification.
At this distance in time, it’s impossible to distinguish the innocents who confessed under torture to whatever they thought would make it stop from the loonies who actually believed that they were witches.
The idea behind that stereotype is that, if women enjoy sex too much, they will go round seeking sexual pleasure from other men, and not remain monogamously faithful to the husband who should be in control of them.
Men are just as unfaithful when they enjoy sex, yes?
SiXSwordS and martialis ask related questions about the same column, so I’ve merged their two threads.
bibliophage
moderator CCC
Yes, but the presumption is that men are in control, so can do what they want, while women are virtually the property of their husbands, so can have their fling on the side. And a big part of that is that men did not want to be raising other men’s children as their own. So the whole thing assumes inequality between the sexes.