raunch dressing

Girls sexuality is all the rage. There's the new study about young women's changing sexual attitudes (via feministing) and all the talk about Ariel Levy's new book Female Chauvinist Pigs

At first I wanted to give this book a chance. I'm not sure why. Something about the explanation of a raunch culture, a discussion of sex and empowerment that includes an acknowledgement that empowerment requires change to make a choice meaningful. The ladies at Slate had a good discussion about the merits of the arguments. . . though it has it's own strange hetereo-normative prudishness to it.

But I knew there was something wrong with the take. Comparing the ladies of Cake to adolescent girls wearing "Porn Star" t-shirts doesn't complicate the issue enough. Something was amiss with Ms. Levy's book -- and it's inordinate amount of press. It seems neither rigorous nor entirely insightful. It does ring a bell for me, but then no one arrives to put out the fire. Then I realized that Ariel Levy was the author of Where The Bois Are the awful piece in New York magazine about the state of ftm transgender kids in nyc. It all became clear. No wonder it's sensational -- that's the schtick.

Still, I find it disapointing. In all of this discussion about how much sex young women are having -- there is no real information on whether or not that sex is getting better, more satisfying, or if boys knowledge of women's sexual pleasure is getting any more complex. This is what I care about. I don't mind kids bumping uglies -- but I want to scream scream scream when I think about sixteen year old girls laying back for a dry, unsatisfying screw.

All of this talk about girl's sexuality and their very real (and also supposed) explotation doesn't ever offer the information or drive home the point that could change it. If you are going to have sex, you need to know what goes where for your lady pleasure. I want a study that talks about that.

As for the "raunch culture" and "female chauvinist pig" argument -- well, I think that raunch culture is slightly abhorrant. The women I know who negogiate it best are able to adapt raunch in positive affirming ways that acknowledge the fucked-upness of it's roots but use it as a means to gain pleasure -- since the alternative is none at all. The sad underside to that is that many women and girls have learned to mimic "empowerment" -- they can say all the words of feminims and independence without being able to incorporate it into their daily lives. That mimicry is where everyone seems to get confused. Because if a sixteen year old says she wants to be a porn star, it could mean one of two things. She's been reading Bust for five years, she knows how to get down, and she doesn't take no shit. Or it means that she knows that gets her attention, she envies self-possession through sex (a self posession that is rarely modeled for women in other contexts besides vamp-sexuality and mommy-dearest homemaker) and doesn't quite understand the implications of her statement. It's hard to distinguish between the two -- and they could very well overlap in a million ways.

And female chauvinist pigs -- well I feel the same way I do about that term as I do "reverse racism." It ain't right. (ie Racism requires bias plus power and privilege. Plain bias is just that.)

That said the trap of women hating other women to get into the boys club is nothing new, but it does seem to have gained new cultural strength in the past ten years. The whole "being down with the boys" and "I don't have girl friends, they're too much trouble" line breaks good golly's heart. The aim is so misdirected, the cycle so self-perpetuating. Don't hate the players girls -- hate the manufacturer of the game.