Sunday, March 9, 2008

Response to Braun, Gavy and McPhillips’ article, “The ‘Fair Deal’? Unpacking Accounts of Reciprocity in Heterosex”

This article examines a new-age heterosex discourse termed “reciprocity”. The authors attempt to unpack the issues surrounding male and female expectations during sex. The premise is that both partners are entitled to give and receive pleasure, with the ultimate goal being orgasm for both partners. While this discourse ensures that female pleasure is accounted for, there are many constraints for both men and women. For example, women feel the pressure to always have an orgasm, while men feel inadequate if they can not sexually please their partner to the point of orgasm. These underlying pressures force heterosexual couples into rigid roles that have specific actions and outcomes expected of them. While we have began to surpass the myths of the female vaginal orgasm and sex solely dependent on penetration, the authors remind us that this framework of reciprocity or “egalitarian” sex can cause significant tension and unfair power distribution in a theoretically equal discourse. In theory, the idea of reciprocity seems flawless but in practice, the way this reciprocity is carried-out, equal sharing of power to actively give and passively receive pleasure is not a reality.

The discussion of “patterns of sex to orgasm” was very interesting. Several couples were interviewed and a pattern of orgasms seemed to develop. The dominant discourse was that women orgasm first, usually through oral stimulation and once the male had completed this task, his orgasms through intercourse. The authors suggest that this sequence of events establishes the idea that women are the passive role, seeing the orgasm as “something that she had as a result of what he did or gave her” (243). This places the male in the active position and instead of this position switching to the female, they both engage in intercourse in order to bring the male to orgasm. Intercourse is not viewed as a gift that the woman gives to her partner, instead it is an act they perform together and thus, the woman is not releases from the passive role.

The next interesting point this article illuminated was the need for a highly sexually educated male to bring his partner to orgasm every time. To me this seems to be an unrealistic ideal that can ultimately cause more harm to both partners. While I believe that both partners are entitled to orgasms, receiving pleasure should not always be defined with the orgasm being the definitive goal. Sexual pleasure is experienced in many different ways and can be fulfilling even it is does not result in an orgasm. A female orgasm not only puts pressure on the woman to always receive “ultimate pleasure” from her partner (which is far from a reality in my opinion), but it also creates a role for men to fulfill this duty or be considered incompetent, or worse yet, feel their partner is incapable of feeling “real” pleasure. I think anxieties of male competence are an issue that many young men I know face. Because there has been so much emphasis on pleasing women in the recent discourse of positive heterosex, if they are unable to bring a woman to orgasm, this threatens their masculine identity. A man responds in an interview that if an orgasm “didn’t happen, then I would be using her” (245), the idea that if the reciprocity is not fulfilled through orgasm then if he orgasms, he will have wrongfully treated his partner. Later, it is also discussed how women feel pressured to have an orgasm in order to boost their partner’s ego. The point is that both partners suffer from this heavy emphasis on reciprocity through orgasm.

The authors discuss positive aspects of reciprocity in heterosex discourse, however, they emphasis the importance of carefully examining every level of this discourse. These levels include the idea of “pure” gifts, the active and passive roles, and male control over the female orgasm. It is important to point these subtitles of experience out because even a more egalitarian discourse can reinforce destructive gender roles that plague our society. I have talked to a lot of girl friends about the pressure we feel to orgasm every time, even when we feel immense amounts of pleasure with the absence of an orgasm, the orgasm seems to be what defines if it was a successful “sex session” or not. I think this article tackles many important issues that I have seen in heterosexual couples that seek to have egalitarian sex.

2 comments:

Kira Price said...

I agree that this article tackles many important struggles of heterosexual relationships-- especially the problem of the orgasm. While I can see how an orgasm came to mark the ultimate goal of a sexual encounter, I don't understand why, after all this time, this "norm" hasn't changed. I have always wondered why there is an incredible amount of pressure to have an orgasm. I know that it is largely due to the fact that in an egalitarian relationship it is an easy way to measure reciprocity during sex. But why haven't we talked about how this isn't necessarily true? There are a lot of other ways to show that the sex is equal, fair, pleasurable without having an orgasm (even though all persons should be entitled to one). I hope that talk about this becomes more prevalent in third wave feminism discourses.

Emily and Patrick said...

I think Annie makes a good point about the pressure on women to orgasm in order for sex to be "successful." I agree with Kira that there should be other ways to demarcate sex as egalitarian without putting pressure on either partner to orgasm to achieve the ideal. We tend to define sexual pleasure or "good sex" as having to include orgasm for both parties, where in actuality, it really requires pleasure of a sexual nature: sexual pleasure.