in response to a fb friend posting this Sheila Jeffreys’ quote from Unpacking Queer Politics: “”[Queer theorists] show no awareness of the insights of feminist writers over thirty years that suggest that it is men’s desires and ideologies, particularly complete obsession with the penis as the fulcrum of sex, that have structured how women are to do sex, and how they are always to experience a lack of the real equipment.”
I added: This is something that has been in my thoughts a lot lately: the fact that there is so little language to even name sexual activities that are female and/or clitorally centred. I just found out, close to a decade after first reading the word in The Hite Report, that, technically, tribadism means a woman rubbing her vulva against any part of a male or female partner, but in most uses, is used synonymously with two women rubbing vulvas together (altho in practice, those “positions” are usually vulva-to-thigh, but i digress). Men, gay, straight, and bi, have such a wider vocabulary to describe what happens to them, for them, by them, etc during sex. As defined by men, sex is what a man does with his dick. Even names for non-intercourse (anal or vaginal) sexual acts reflect this. Men have specific terms for rubbing their dick against specific body parts, for example. Do we? I doubt it. I remember reading a critique of Marilyn Frye’s essay on lesbian sex (eg what is sex, do lesbians have it, etc) because Frye claims we do lack this vocab to describe female, specifically lesbian, experience. The critiquer stated that working class and of colour women do have said vocab and robust language, but simply stated that, and didn’t let this welfare-poor white young woman in on it. I was thinking: if we do have it available, why are you keeping it from us? tell me!