Sexuality and Self-Image

     The readings from our textbook addressed many of the facets, evolutions, and manifestations of women's definitions of and relationships with their sexuality. One excerpt in particular reads: 

     "Heterosexuality is prescribed or natural for women and men, men are the initiators in heterosexual encounters, and men's sexuality is assertive and in need of regular release. In such scenarios a woman's role is to be modest and virtuous, to look beautiful, and, simultaneously, to lure men and to fend them off.... Men's sexual activity is assumed and expected; after all, 'boys will be boys.' Girls may easily get a 'bad reputation' and be condemned as 'sluts'" (Kirk and Okazawa-Rey, 175).

     In many of the subtopics beneath the umbrella of sexuality (raunch culture, promiscuity in relation to morality, the construct of purity, masturbation, the validity of certain sexualities, etc.), it seems like people's opinions are not only passionately held but are also strongly polarized. The middle ground between the two main perspectives functions as more of a buffer zone than as a place where many people can comfortably take a truly moderate stance between the two points of view. Because sexuality is a part of humanity that is both intensely personal and intensely political, the often-contradictory perspectives can be damaging and confusing to children/adolescents who hear opposing absolutes from different authority figures— especially because these differences are often related to how one ought to perceive, present, and place value in oneself. Often, the messages that women in particular receive growing up are primers for a lifetime of being regarded as an object, a receptacle, a scapegoat, and a person who is somehow powerless yet also is the inviting initiator of any unwanted/inappropriate desires, impulses, or behaviors. We are commonly taught in one way or another that our sexuality is both of primary importance to our success and worth and also a dangerous weapon that absolves anyone in the vicinity of the responsibility for their response to our presence. For example, here is an open letter from a mother to teenage girls that discusses one perspective on female sexuality, what is and is not appropriate to acknowledge in public environments, the roles men and women play, and what defines a good and moral person. After that post went viral, opinions on its content seemed to be either intensely supportive or strongly critical. Here is one response that embodies the opposite end of this particular spectrum of beliefs. 

     Personally, I think that both articles are potentially problematic, but in distinct ways. The original letter from Mrs. Hall seems to come from a place of good intentions, but I can't in good conscience agree with anything she says, and I personally believe that those kinds of statements and standards are unbelievably unhealthy, patriarchal, oppressive, and destructive. In contrast, the response article irritates me in the way some parts are written— the author comes across at times as condescending, mainly in the first and final paragraphs which tonally communicated a disdain for Mrs. Hall both as a person and for her perspectives. However, the author of the response also raises tremendously important points, demonstrates critical thought and analysis, and articulates views that, in my opinion, are immeasurably more healthy, multidimensional, accepting, and inspirational than those of Mrs. Hall. To me, the occasional perceived chill between the lines of a sentence are of next to no importance in light of the well-thought-out and eloquent response as a whole. In the most important ways, this is my definition of a feminist response, and that has a lot to do with my personal experiences and upbringing. So, I'm curious about how others see this dialogue: which one do you agree with most? Which one have you come in contact with more frequently throughout your childhood and adolescence? Which one do you think more closely matches your definition of feminism, and why?