Saturday, December 20, 2008

"She's Not Like That"-Slut Shaming and Taking Credit for Your Sexual Choices

I was talking to an old friend and ex-lover (let's just call him S) on MSN last night, and in the interest of catching up on each other's lives, I teasingly asked him if he was still a "slut." (It should be noted here that I wasn't using the word in a negative context-I teasingly and lovingly call myself and my friends "slut" from time to time, but if anyone expresses discomfort with the word I don't use it to describe them anymore. It's a reclamation thing for me.) While I was humming "Otherside" in my head, he replied that no, he wasn't a slut anymore. He said that he's looking for a serious relationship and ready to settle down. We chatted a little about the whys and wherefores of his thoughts and moved on. Later in the conversation, something came up about this girl he's "sort of seeing." Now, when I say I'm "sort of seeing" someone, it's usually a euphemism. So, I (again, somewhat teasingly) asked, "So you're sleeping with her?" He replied, "No, she's not like that. That's why I like her so much. She doesn't sleep with guys she's not dating."

I was definitely bothered by that statement, but I couldn't quite put my finger on exactly why it was so wrong. I mean, it offended me personally, in the sense that this guy obviously knows that I'm "like that," or at least was before I got all monogamous and shit. But a voice at the back of my brain was telling me that it was wrong on a larger scale. I just wasn't listening closely enough to hear exactly why. So I settled for pointing out that I was annoyed, to which he replied, "Oh, that was years ago." I didn't feel like getting into it any deeper than that, so we changed the subject and moved on.

This morning, it hit me. S was putting all the responsibility for sexual morality on the woman.

Now, I'm not trying to convert people to promiscuity here-if you don't believe in sleeping with someone until the relationship has reached such and such a stage (exclusive dating, marriage, whatever) that's your business, and I applaud your conviction. If S has decided that he's not into casual sex anymore, that's totally rad for him. But saying "she's not like that" makes no mention of his decision to wait, instead dumping the burden of purity, virtue and self-control squarely on the shoulders of the woman.

Also, the very phrasing of the sentence implies defensiveness. What if he had said "I'm not like that"? Such a turn of phrase would imply that he was scandalized, or at the very least somehow offended, by my assumption that he would be open to the idea of casual sex-it implies that willingness to engage in sexual activity outside the confines of a specific relationship structure is somehow a negative trait. Therefore, using this wording on the behalf of the woman, coupled with "that's why I like her," implies that any woman who is "like that," any woman who has sex when she's not "supposed to," is somehow unworthy of his affection. It also implies that her relative "purity" (in the sense of any sex she has being "appropriate" and therefore somehow less "dirty") is the primary reason for his attraction to her. The suggestion is that her "virtue" is prized over any other positive personality traits.

Now, S isn't a bad guy. Quite the contrary, actually. I don't really believe that he would intentionally convey the messages that I outlined above. This is just an example of how the prevailing patriarchal value system has completely taken over speech patterns and thought processes.

"Oh, Rebecca," I hear you saying, "stop being such a paranoid feminist. You know the poor guy didn't mean anything by it. Don't be so sensitive."

The problem is that when such oppressive language is acceptable, women suffer. Maybe S wasn't trying to be a slut shamer, but his choice of words accomplished that regardless of his intention. As for being oversensitive, I believe that the cultural mandate to not take offense to anything, regardless of how it is phrased, contributes hugely to the culture of victim-blaming that I see so much today. It is not your responsibility to not be offended by me, it is my responsibility to not offend you. I don't have to be less sensitive to your hurtful speech, however inadvertent it may be-you have to be more aware of what you are saying and to whom you are saying it.

So, here's a little fantasy script detailing what I think (I hope) S actually meant, in language that more clearly expresses a healthy attitude towards women and sex, while taking personal responsibility.

Me: So are you sleeping with her?
S: No, I don't sleep with people I'm not dating anymore. She feels the same way. I like that about her.

See what I did there? I phrased it so that he takes personal responsibility for his sexual choice and acknowledges that she has the same value system and that he appreciates that, without making her sexual morality into the sole factor for his attraction to her.

I realize that this level of consciousness in everyday speech is difficult. I slip up sometimes too. And I'd like to reiterate that I'm not trying to frame S as some sort of horrible misogynistic douchenozzle. I'm using his statement as an example of how prevalent anti-woman language is in our everyday lives. Most people probably wouldn't think twice about saying exactly what he did, or about having it said to them. But the fact that such things pass so many lips and ears without comment is both a symptom of and a contributor to the shaming of women who dare to make personal decisions about their own bodies and sexuality, the idea that women must bear the burden of "purity," and that if they don't there's something wrong with them. These ideas and language patterns must be noted and corrected whenever possible if we ever hope to live in a truly equitable society.

Yes, the world in my head is a fantasy utopia of social awareness. Also, there are unicorns. It's quite nice, really.

No comments: