When someone comments on HT’s inputs using the word ‘feminism’, I sigh a little bit. Because there’s one thing that inspires me about this blog and Debauchette’s work, both the writey and fucky sides of it, and it’s that we seemed to have transcended categories, and were into real psychological-experiential exploration beyond gender politics.

Why should we go beyond gender politics, or perhaps on what contexts should we do that? In contexts where there is no-one to argue against. HT seems to me to represent – and I aspire after this – the 20s/30s masculinity that is essentially post-sexist. We give women whatever they want within what powers we have. And what more could anyone ask for? Except perhaps participation in a broader struggle against patriarchy where it still exists (Diane Sawyer’s brain? her hemline?). And we do that, again, with pragmatic constraints (I’m an environmental designer, and I am already busy in terms of agenda, but I do my best, short of touting for Hillary.)

So when HT-types wade in and say, hold it a tick, “who’s really winning if promiscuity becomes the main game?”, I think the response to this – hey like the lady D says in response to HT (but I am not, ahem, sucking up) – is to focus back on the personal, not to try to elaborate some post-feminist thing against HT (or any bloke) commenting on women etc. Why? Partly as I say because the gender war is not something you need to wage with people like HT. The idea that he (or his would-bes, like me) is trying to put women down substantively is no more sensible than imagining SATC is substantively putting women down.

But also, because what this blog is doing is /assuming/ rights, and saying, hey what next?!

What’s exciting about this is what I commented in my previous post (here http://debauchette.wordpress.com/2008/02/07/fucktoyism-or-faux-rape/#comment-1148): that we have reached the point that two people don’t /have/ negotiate the structures of gender power, or even the details of consent. They can just live and do whatever their emotional and physical imaginations guide them to do, as a momentary unit.

One way of saying this is to suggest that promiscuity is not the same as sluttism (or whatever noun you use for that). Promiscuity is the moralism-laced anti-monogamy: and to lionise it is to challenge monogamy. Cue HT, cue feminism comments, cue unsatisfactory analysis of what (I believe) is going on here. (If ‘here’ is a reasonable enough to word to describe Lady D’s public experiences.) Sluttism, or whatever D is doing, is something pretty much beyond political fights. The word itself implies a reclaiming of a pejorative word, quasi-political, but it’s small-p political. The experiences D describes are just personal, not back-at-the-world give-my-space etc.

I love that. It’s exciting to explore the potentials of experience, beyond politics. Let’s do more of this. The importance of this is for me: that sexism and patriarchy has only had as its smaller casuality (I realise this is a provocative comment – rhetoric, people, cool it) women’s rights. The larger casualty is the experiential and relating potential of liberated people.

We can’t find out who we as human individuals are until we go beyond patriarchy. But just putting patriarchy aside is not going beyond it. HT’s frustration (I read, but maybe project) is the lack of definition in experience and teleology of relating, in a non-patriarchal, okay-with-promiscuity world. I totally dig that. Absence of bad is not, in the end, a final good. In the end, it’s empty. We have to fill our social-life spaces anew.

I celebrate D’s experiences (that’s not the name you used in a message, but maybe I shouldn’t mention that?), not because they promote promiscuity (I don’t even think they do), but because they are reconnoitering new terrain in human relational experience. The life beyond patriarchy. Fucking wow.

[...]

“feeling free to question whether monogamy, or the monogamy we know, is working for us”

I think it’s more the realization that all of society doesn’t have to approach sex in the same manner. From the way you write, multiple partners seem to work for -you-. To me, it doesn’t seem to be important what (or who) everyone else is doing (or not doing), it’s more important what works for you as long as you’re upfront about it with your partners.

My wife doesn’t find my sluttiness particularly attractive. My lover does. And with my lover (whom my wife knows about) I open up, find myself in new places, redefine who I am, all in ways you describe (which slutty duckling quotes). I am more me, because of her. Before she entered my life, I was afraid of myself. Now, I am at home. But I don’t live with her, and my wife (says herself) that she gets the reward of my stronger soul. And alexad says what I feel about my lover, as well. It’s pretty great.

So what, exactly, is monogamy? In my life, it was a barrier. What you describe with Gabriel sounds powerful, nearly terrifying in its depth. It sounds utterly gorgeous.

My eye still wanders, as I’m sure hers does, but the effort required along with the knock-backs, don’t really make it worth the effort these days…Luckily we both still find each other sexually attractive, even with our physical deteriorations.
Without doubt, we both have had many exciting liaisons over the years, before getting together. But we have grown together sexually – both understanding each others needs, and catering for them. In fact it is more passionate today, than when we 1st met..we are more explorative.
I guess there is no need to be monogamous whilst younger, provided you are honest and responsible for your actions…but yeah, don’t get caught in that ‘Judeo Christian construct’ either
Thankfully, I have ended up in a partnership I can live with, and go into my ‘fucking’ dotage with.

This is one thing that as I explore, I continue to be astounded by. Aggressive sex has not only made me more comfortable with my fantasies, it’s also led me to understand some deep parts of my personality a lot better. Like making a conscious choice of allowing a man to bind or spank me; There’s something powerful about making that choice to relinquish power. And some of my most intimate moments have been with a partner amid hyper-aggressive sex. It opens up a whole wormhole of intimacy that one can’t even define by the same terms as he would the intimacy of a relationship. It increases trust in my partner and in myself and I can finally relax enough to feel those emotions that I hide during the non-sexual parts of a relationship. It’s so important to me now, even if just for those reasons.