Hookup Culture Rightly Laid at Feminism’s Feet

by Susan Walsh on December 19, 2011 · 1,067 comments

in Hooking Up Realities, Politics and Feminism

The Good Men Project has been a real sh*tshow lately. The site’s founder, Tom Matlack, found himself labeled an ALLY FAIL by radical feminists the other day. They’ve been feasting at his blog for months, but they didn’t hesitate to devour the hand that feeds them …I imagine that by now Matlack looks like he submerged his arms in a tank of piranhas. 

Interesting “feedback.” I really thought the MRA guys were crazy until I engaged the wrath of the feminists. Insane.

Tom Matlack

I’ll dish up the dirt at the end of the post, but first I want to call your attention to Is Feminism to Blame for Hookup Culture?just published there by Neely Steinberg. It came out of this whole kerfuffle, and in it she offers a contrast of her views with the views of feminist Hugo Schwyzer.

I mentioned to Hugo that I was intrigued by our contrasting positions—his steadfast defense of feminism and critiquing of men versus my critiquing of feminism and steadfast defense of men—not because we disagree in the ideological sense, but because of our tendency to stray from defending our own gender. 
Hugo went first. Choice bits:
 …My views about pleasure-centered sex education are very much rooted in what I’ve lived through and what I’ve seen.
 
I’ve been married to four women, been “in love” with twice that many, and for a brief but intense period in my 20s and early 30s, I was very promiscuous. I now live very happily in a monogamous marriage. I’m not haunted by what I did, nor did the tremendous variety of experiences I had when I was younger spoil any opportunity for fulfillment with just one partner in an enduring relationship. Without compromising her privacy, I can say that my current (and last) wife’s life prior to our marriage was not dissimilar to my own. The intimacy we have today is at least partly a consequence of our experiences with other people, not in spite of them.
 
…Women in particular need reassurance that their worth is not linked to their number of sexual partners. They need to hear that pursuing pleasure for its own sake when they’re young will not make it more difficult to form enduring monogamous relationships (if they want them) when they’re older.
 
…I do regret the pain I caused other people. Rightly so. But what my life has taught me is that insight and compassion are rooted in experience; you can’t advise about what you don’t understand. My own ability to be a patient father, a faithful husband, a decent teacher and mentor isn’t in spite of my wild sexual choices when I was younger—it’s in large part because of them, and the lessons I learned.
 
…I want to equip young people to discover their own sexuality and to make informed, pleasure-centered, empathy-centered decisions based on what they discover. I want them to know that they have the inner resilience to recover from the “silly” and “vapid” decisions they may make.
 
Here’s Neely:
I happen to think most women aren’t all that interested in having a lot of [casual sex] for purely sexual reasons, with multiple partners no less. And I’ve come to believe that feminism’s inability, and at times refusal, to acknowledge differences between the sexes has been disingenuous and has gravely backfired on women, leaving them ill-equipped to discover what really feels good and right to them.
 
…I was told, by the 10% of women who are capable of effectively and consistently compartmentalizing their emotions when it comes to no-strings attached sex, that emotions were overrated, anathema even, and could easily be separated from sexual acts with another human being, to unapologetically unleash my inner slut (there’s that word again). It was our right (rite?) as women, our responsibility as sexual creatures, to show the world we can fuck like men do, have instantaneous orgasms, and feel faaaabulous while doing it in our 4-inch Manolo Blahniks. Countless women bought into this lie, only to realize years later that it doesn’t, in fact, feel so great most of the time, and that actually, there’s nothing all that empowering and liberating about spreading your legs with wild abandon.
 
On her years in the hook-up scene:
 
It’s as if I needed the crutch of Vodka to tell me what I was doing was an awesome idea, because without it I’d know better. I wasn’t alone. It was happening all around me. My friends, female acquaintances, countless women I’d met briefly over the years—we were all in the same boat. Post-college, we could pursue our careers and hobbies and passions full-force but were unable to form lasting attachments, to believe that a man wanted us for anything more than a quick hook-up, to understand what real intimacy was about.
 
…If feminism’s goal was to eradicate the falsehood that a woman’s worth is tied to her sexuality, it has failed on many accounts. All I learned from drunken, fleeting hook-ups over the course of a decade was how much I was being viewed as a sexual object by men, as a vagina who happens to think and feel, rather than a thinking, feeling human being who also happens to have a vagina.
 
And finally on the feminist movement itself:
I understand everyone’s journey is unique, but I think young women today are looking for different, more tempered voices other than the I-am-woman-hear-me-roar variety, for tangible, strategic dating advice (such as, if you want a relationship try developing emotional, spiritual, and mental bonds with a man you like or just started dating by delaying sexual gratification—yours and his).
 
The always insightful Stuart Schneiderman had this to say about the article:
 
Very few men openly identify themselves as feminists. Still, many men happily mouth the basic tenets of the feminist credo. They may not understand what they are saying, but they support the cause because they feel grateful for what feminism has done for them.
 
Take Hugo Schwyzer. He has been married four times. He has had countless casual sexual encounters and no small number of relationships. Manifestly, he feels grateful and perhaps endebted to feminism for having provided him with so much free love.
 
So, he defends the feminist party line.
 
In debating Neely Steinberg Schwyzer does not dispute that feminism, especially sex-positive feminism, has helped create the hookup culture.
 
Yet, Schwyzer thinks it’s a good thing, for him, for his fourth wife, and for everyone who wants to learn from experience. Being anything but a gentleman Schwyzer lets on that his fourth wife can match him hookup for hookup.
 …As it happens, Steinberg is far more cogent and thoughtful than Schwyzer. In truth, Schwyzer doesn’t seem to be thinking at all.
He wants young women to see their hookups as learning experiences. It’s amusing to see an ideological zealot defending the value of experience. What would Schwyzer say if experience taught people that feminism is exploiting young women to advance its ideological agenda?

I thank Neely for bringing these opposing views into the open where they may be examined and discussed. Neely’s post came out of a furious Twitter squabble when Tom Matlack pissed off the radfems by objecting to Schwyzer’s post In Rape Culture, All Men Are Guilty Until Proven Innocent, and then by daring to suggest this:

Men and women are different. Quite different in fact. But women would really like men to be more like them.

I can’t imagine Neely’s article is going to help Matlack get back into the Piranhas’ good graces, but if he continues to speak out against man hating and female supremacy the Good Men Project will be a much better blog. Voices like Neely Steinberg’s need and deserve to be heard.

By the way, for my view on whether feminism is to blame for hookup culture, see How Feminism Got Drunk and Hooked Up With a Loser. Shoot, does the title give it away?

 

{ 1062 comments… read them below or add one }

1 6 7 8

1051 tom December 29, 2011 at 10:56 am

Jesus that is just your opinion. You have no idea if a person who has a ons is relatioship material or not. Obviously millions of examples would disagree with you. I know I had had sex with a woman for no othter reason than she was hot.. hopefully that was her reasoning also. That is eons away from the emotions a person feels for another when love strikes. I have had women tell me while single they noticed men everywhere but when in love it was only on occation they saw one who turned their head.. Id say that is pretty normal. Even people in love can notice a nice looking person, doesn’t mean they want to do them.

1052 Jesus Mahoney December 29, 2011 at 11:07 am

Jesus that is just your opinion.,

Duh.

1053 Badger December 29, 2011 at 12:14 pm

Hey Jesus, how come you haven’t answered my email?

1054 Jesus Mahoney December 29, 2011 at 1:22 pm

Badger. Let me know where you e-mailed me. And shoot another one to jesusmahoney@yahoo.com. That’s the one I’ve been using for blogs.

1055 DC December 29, 2011 at 10:45 pm

Total respect for someone who’s right up front about expectations. If a man isn’t interested in relationship just into ONS and is upfront about that — respect for honesty. Leading someone on, though, and ‘tricking’ a vulnerable person — that’s a jerk. If someone wants pure and chaste but is a total whoremonger — well, that’s called being a hypocrite. Even then I would respect him more if he was upfront with the woman and that he was only into her for sex. A man has the right not to want marriage or LTR for whatever reason, but if you screw someone and then reject because they are a slut, well, that’s a hypocrite. If you just reject them because they’re not what you’re looking for, I would really have no problem with that. After all, I can reject whoever I want, for whatever reason, and so can anyone else.

1056 Michael December 30, 2011 at 2:18 am

It’s much more complex than creating a polemic between two camps. The real crux comes in getting to the essence of what YOU want to get out of the relationship, and what demons you’re harboring or what fulfillment you’re seeking to gain/provide. And perhaps a more futile effort of understanding your partner’s. Be honest and integral and expect the same from your partner, even if that partner is only for a matter of hours.

1057 Abbot December 30, 2011 at 7:00 am

“But oh yeah only messed up women have casual sex”

Maybe…maybe not. But since men are universally naturally uncomfortable committing to them or do not want to take a chance beyond sex with them then:

Women. Don’t. Care

or do they?

No. Harm. Done.

or is there?

1058 jess December 31, 2011 at 6:03 am

DC on hypocrisy

yes, well put

1059 Abbot December 31, 2011 at 12:37 pm

Take back the word! Be proud. Own it. Reclaim it. Render it as neutral and ineffective as it actually is! There is no shame.

2012 is the year of HypocrisyWalk

Followed by the DoubleStandardRun.

and the MadonnaWhoreSwim

a real triathlon reaffirming that men proudly play by their own rules because…they can. Universally.

1060 Lindsay December 31, 2011 at 3:25 pm

Each person is different, their needs and wants – sexually and otherwise – are different, and the type of people they seek to form long-term relationships with are different. While the owner of this blog is, I assume, correct in relating that the women she knows regret casual sex, that women don’t really enjoy casual sex, and that casual sex is damaging to women, my experience has proven opposite. I know entirely sex-positive women who enjoy casual sex and have, as they say, “sex like a man.” I am one of those women as well. It is my suspicion that like attracts like, and that people choose to keep the company of others whose tastes and views reflect and complement their own. I also didn’t see much of a hook-up culture during my time at college (more often, women “going steady” or practicing serial monogamy), but I’m a late Gen-Xer, so times may have changed.

I have slept with more than 20 people (male and female), as has my husband. This number does not bother me, nor does the hook-up culture particularly. I enjoyed it tremendously. In my early-mid 20s, I began dating my husband. We slept together on the second “date,” if you could indeed call it a date – but we actually just casually hung out. (I don’t like fancy dates and I don’t like dinner dates at all.) We believe women and men are inherently the same, that gender is a culturally prescribed role, and that fancy dates are a waste of money and time.

More people feel like us than you would guess – many more. However, you will not find them posting here – they are on tech boards, some of the Web sites quoted in the article, book club Web sites, and you name it. We, likewise, have found hundreds of like-minded folk among our clubbing friends, our Facebook friends, our work friends, and so forth. As mentioned above, like attracts like, and people seek the company of those with similar attitudes to their own. I noticed that a commenter above remarked that women with more than 20 partners had “made many mistakes” and had “serious lapses in judgment.” It’s your right to hold any belief you want, and more power to you. My guiding principle for myself (and not for anyone else) is that any number is a fine number, so long as you were always safe, sane, consensual, and enjoyed it. My husband and I have an active sex life and have no STDs. I do not consider any of my partners “mistakes,” but rather, learning experiences and great times.

Marriage was not of particular concern to me. Nor was “settling down.” It just happened, but I did not particularly care whether it happened or not. I have money (inherited and made – I work in the “T” part of the STEM fields), and I came from the much-vaunted white, upper-middle class suburban lifestyle that attempts to recreate the 1950s in the 80s and 90s. It’s not for me. I don’t want to go back there. I don’t like the roles for women that this culture and lifestyle advises. If a certain subset of men, women, or both judges me morally bankrupt for having been sexually active in my teens and 20s, or considers me damaged goods for having enjoyed myself sexually, I’m fine with that. I’ve suffered no ill effects from enjoying my youth and if I had a chance to do it over, I wouldn’t change a thing.

My husband is both gorgeous and brilliant, in case you’re wondering, and we both work in a technical field. We both had one serious LTR of a little over a year each prior to meeting, and many 2/3/4/5-month long “mini relationships,” or, as I suppose you call them on here, “flings.” I believe one reason we were able to date each other so successfully, and so quickly (we were exclusive about 3 months in) was because we did not invest a great deal of time or emotional energy into the relationship at the outset. If it worked, it worked. If it didn’t, it didn’t. We’ve both found that fretting about relationships and trying to control their outcome is the quickest way to end them – but to each his own, and more power to all.

1061 Lindsay December 31, 2011 at 3:31 pm

I should add, as well, that I believe people are best matched to those whose sexual standards and values reflect their own. In my circle, one’s number is not so much the question – the questions are, are you safe, are you sane, are you consensual. In others, number is king, and lowest is best, particularly for women. The two circles aren’t compatible, and attempting to cross over into one when you belong in the other results in anger and dissatisfaction for all parties involved. Know what you want, and identify those who share that value, and you’ll be happy. That’s a good rule for anyone.

1062 jess January 1, 2012 at 9:34 pm

Lindsay,
what an interesting and illuminating account-

I love your attitude and outlook- a breath of fresh air….

1 6 7 8

Leave a Comment

{ 5 trackbacks }

Subscribe without commenting