ext_317395 ([identity profile] kittywampus.blogspot.com) wrote in [personal profile] sunflowerp 2008-04-01 02:30 pm (UTC)

As I mentioned to you on my blog, Sunflower, I have no doubt that you've got your own kind of sexy. It's not just that you're smart; you have a sexy mind, and the two things together are a hot combination. At least, that's a major attraction for me in men, and I'm just not willing to believe that *all* men only care about plastic beauty.

But this just points out, once again, the trouble with our words. You and other commenters have already pointed out how crucial it is that we redefine "sexy" in much broader terms than the pornified, air-brushed images of supposed hawtness that honestly just don't have much to do at all with women's pleasures and fantasies. I just want to say that I loved this statement: "And, bloody hell, if being able to be sexy in one's own, unique, individual way, entirely independent of conformity to some hypothetical standard, isn't part of what we've been fighting for, I'm in the wrong movement."

I don't generally like "sex-positive" as a term because it gets too many people's hackles up in an unproductive way. ("What, are you saying I don't like sex??!!") And it's too mired in the Sex Wars, which are now just about a quarter century old. Maybe something like "sex-radical" works better? The language problem might make good fodder for a future post. (Not forthcoming from me; I have no desire to attract the traveling brouhaha!)


Post a comment in response:

This account has disabled anonymous posting.
If you don't have an account you can create one now.
HTML doesn't work in the subject.
More info about formatting