The following is my post from May 22nd. It was going to be my last because I was on my way to finding my voice. Yeah! My confidence and purpose would keep me writing without the “views” and “likes” of wordpress. After having it up for several days though, being embarrassed by revealing secrets, I took it down in order to censor it. I also wanted to rewrite it in four separate pieces, as there was much to add to make the story complete. So far I’ve done nothing, and am putting the post back up just as it was.
As I push the publish button tonight there are 713 comments on the Times article.
Today’s Times article Unexcited? There May Be a Pill for That by Daniel Bergner about the research to find a “desire” pill for the many, many women who are unable for whatever reason to enjoy lovemaking although they so badly want to, has me laughing. Do not quote me out of context.
Laughing because just recently I read another article that hopefully has put an end to my pain as I tried to understand, appreciate and accept my own struggle with my sexuality, and if I had written this last week, perhaps my article would be on the first page of www.nytimes.com. Probably not!
Laughing because women have been saying “please no, I have a headache” for a very long time. Others try, others pretend. What has sparked this current research? Is there a woman behind it? We know money is behind it.
Laughing because this article does not mention marijuana, the natural wonder drug, an herb, if that makes any difference. Marijuana happily is not yet, and hopefully never will be in the hands of big pharma. One of the more unusual messages to pass through my inbox recently was a proposal that the post office become the sole distributor of marijuana. Could that be possible? Just keep it simple, keep it home-grown, keep its quality and diversity, add a tax but keep the price low, and keep it organic and away from agri-business. No one needs to inhale Monsanto’s poisons.
Laughing because I wonder if this pill will be available only to women who are married and of childbearing age, do not work for religious organizations, and have sworn to their congressmen that they will only use it if they are trying desperately to have a child. Making it necessary for husbands to sign these agreements would help keep us women in line. Filthy rich men could also have signing privileges and receive tax breaks for their purchases. Women who use the pill illegally would be reviled on national television and would be sent to private prisons where they would be sexually harassed and humiliated as part of their rehabilitation.
Laughing because all we women need is another runaround with religion, superstition, Republicans, the men and unbelievably even some women who think of us as “s—ts” (gosh, I can’t even write the word without shuddering) if we should equate any sort of feminine pleasure with sex.
Laughing because if there really is an interest in finding a way for women to enjoy lovemaking or just plain sex, why has no drug company jumped on the manufacture of a generic Estring, which makes sex so much more pleasant for post-menopausal women and their partner/s.
Laughing because so many of us women have come to believe through experience and indoctrination that men think sex is dirty, a means of subjugation, a boy’s club prerogative, and then, so do we – think it is dirty, a means of subjugation — and therefore are conflicted about it.
We’ve been brought up to believe some things are good or bad, natural or abhorrent, blessings or sins. Some of us have had good experiences, good touches, and seen loving relationships to emulate. Others of us haven’t. Our introductions and experiences with our sexuality vary immensely. Our minds and bodies very often don’t work in unison.
I was very happily married for twenty-five years to a man who shared a similar mindset about love and lovemaking. It was not very liberated. I was never unfaithful, never even thought about it. Life was good. Know though, that I married in my late thirties and didn’t believe in waiting.
Eventually, some time after my husband passed away, I started to think about how nice it would be to be with another good man.
My first date told me over coffee that he didn’t like women to arch. It took me a little longer to realize he did not like women at all. I’m not exactly sure what he liked, except perhaps himself. That’s not right. He may have thought himself more important, smarter and better than any one else, and that the world revolved around him, but I can’t believe he actually liked himself. He also asked me repeatedly what I meant by “a good man.”
Another told me that he did not want to be part of my research — crazy experimentation was what he called it. He thought everybody else was crazy. Trying to get along with him could drive anyone to that point. He taught me not to share all of my ideas about life and to run at the first sign of inconsistency.
And a third wanted me to be a cure for his sexual dysfunction. No legal or illegal drug helped him, and I wasn’t going to try.
Interesting facts: all three of these men were divorced at least twice. None of them could remember marriage ever being happy. And all three are still looking for the perfect woman, the figment of their imaginations who speak and act on cue to their needs and wishes.
Out of respect for my constant companion (& friend in old age) and my sons and his, I don’t want to comment on our more private moments. He does however make me smile and giggle.
And how did I finally come to get my head around my struggles with my sexuality? A great part of my success is due to my cc&fioa. The ah hah moment however came just a week or two ago when reading The Desires of Margaret Fuller by Judith Thurman in The New Yorker on the publication of Margaret Fuller: A New American Life, by Megan Marshall:
Her inchoate feelings for [James] Nathan were not merely virginal. As she herself acknowledged, in forgiving him, they were ‘childish.’ But perhaps they suggest why her writing was never as great as her ambitions for it. She could love and desire intensely, but rarely at the same moment, and she could think and feel deeply, but not often in the same sentence. . .
Fuller inevitably fell in love with [Adam] Mickiewicz, and it seems, for once, to have been mutual. ‘He affected me like music,’ she told Rebecca Spring. But it also appears, from their letters, that he had recognized what vital element – not only sex but honesty about desire – was missing from Margaret’s life. ‘The first step in your deliverance,’ he told her,’ ‘is to know if it is permitted to you to remain a virgin.’
Reading more about Margaret Fuller I discovered that in 1845 she wrote in her book Woman in the Nineteenth Century:
There exists in the mind of men a tone of feeling towards women as slaves.
I must read more.
When I first read this morning Times article there were no comments. As I push the publish button there are 279. I’m not reading them.