The Dirtiest Word

Lately, there has been a lot of press about slut-shaming, and the judgement passed on people (mostly women) as a result of their sexualities and sexual lifestyle choices. The slutwalk phenomenon was started by feminist groups to raise awareness of the fact that it is the female victims who are more often blamed for sexual abuse and assault for wearing short, tight, revealing, 'slutty' clothes, rather than the attacker and rapist. Which is obviously ludicrous - if a crime is committed, you blame the culprit. For example, you don't blame the design of the iPod when it gets stolen, you blame the thief. This seems so obvious to me that I'm wondering why it's even an issue.

But that's not why I'm writing today.

I'm actually writing about virginity.

As a result of this 21st century brand of feminism that has really come about as a result of the old-world views clashing with new-world thought processes and understandings and fuelled no end by social media, the Toronto Slutwalk was initiated. On their website, they wrote about reclaiming the term "slut", saying:

Historically, the term ‘slut’ has carried a predominantly negative connotation. Aimed at those who are sexually promiscuous, be it for work or pleasure, it has primarily been women who have suffered under the burden of this label. And whether dished out as a serious indictment of one’s character or merely as a flippant insult, the intent behind the word is always to wound, so we’re taking it back. “Slut” is being re-appropriated.


The re-appropriation of insults is nothing new - as seen by the word "gay" being reclaimed by homosexual groups in the late 20th century, and a certain word used to refer to African Americans and People of Colour, that rimes with "bigger" and now appears in popular music, rapped by Kanye West et al. "Slut" is a good one to reclaim as well, because it is so well-known, is a verb and an adjective as well as a noun. The moral of this is that it's OK to dress provocatively because sexual assault is never the fault of the victim. Which I agree with wholeheartedly. As well as this, no one (and I am intentionally not referring to women only, which is something that I will elaborate on another time) should be judged on their sexual habits or lifestyle choices. If you choose and willingly consent to have sex with a bunch of different people, all the more power to you. It's no one else's place to judge you for that... and really, I don't see why it's anyone else's business. So claim the word slut, be sexually liberated, and don't feel condemned.

The message that I keep on finding in this conversation is that it's fine, good, accepted to be sexually active.

But what if you're not?

It seems to me, that there is this horrific double standard going on and no one even pays attention. The 'V' word has become the dirtiest word in the English language.

In 2002, Better Health Victoria did a survey that indicated the sexual activity of teenagers in Years 10 to 12, and which said that by the end of High School, more than half of students have had sex. They talk about it, they know the risks and they choose to make that decision. Within the first couple of years after finishing school, the percentage of people who have had sex skyrockets, so by the time they turn 20, the majority of people have had at least one sexual partner... and the people who haven't had any, aren't really talked about.

Virginity is not talked about. It's presumed that most people aren't virgins after they turn 20, and if they are, then it's a definite choice they have made - usually for religious or cultural reasons. It's assumed that they're "saving themselves" for marriage, engagement, or at least a long-term relationship. These assumptions are made, without the person in question ever being asked. And for some reason, it's never OK to pass judgement on someone for the clothes they wear or how many people they've slept with, but it is absolutely fine to make assumptions when someone reveals that they haven't slept with anyone, ever. And this is shown in pop culture, too.

If people are virgins for religious, cultural or moral reasons, that's great, and I really admire the strength of conviction that some people have. But for others, it's not so welcome, and becomes a major secret - I have heard of people feeling like they have a big "V" branded on their forehead, when no one else should ever even care. It's the Closet of the 21st century - in a world where sexuality is seen in everything from movies aimed at teens to prime-time advertising, it becomes a much bigger issue than it needs to be. While the "SlutWalk" occurred to prove a point, there would never be anything like that for people who are virgins by choice or because it's just the way it happened because it's so secretive. When thinking of virginity, words like "pure", "clean" and "gift" are thrown around, which is plainly bullshit leftover from an older society. We have moved on, but that means that some things have been left behind.

In the TV show Community, Alison Brie's character Annie reveals that she's a virgin in the first season - and Yvette Nicole Brown's character Shirley refers to her as a 'unicorn'. In the 1995 movie Clueless, Tai calls Cher a "jealous virgin". And Lena Dunham's show Girls, Shoshanna (Zosia Mamet) reveals that she is a virgin in the second episode, and is incredibly embarrassed by it - so it's a major plot point when (spoilers) she has sex in the season finale. Is this seriously how we view virginity? As something to be embarrassed of and derided for? And if it's not a source of negativity, it's just not spoken of at all. There is a massive taboo that exists around the entire idea, and I just don't understand why.

When someone who's in their 20s reveals that they are a virgin, the main reaction - other than surprise - is to ask 'why'. As if there has to be a concrete reason. For some people, it just doesn't happen. Has anyone seen the movie The 40 Year Old Virgin? In that, when asked the question, he says "I don't know... it just never happened.", which is then followed by a montage of scenes where he was obviously so close, but never got there. He is so embarrassed by it that he stops hanging out with people outside of his work and his elderly neighbours.

I just don't understand why it's an issue. Why it's assumed that it's a choice made for whatever reason - and I feel that women have the weight of history here, with the concept of "saving yourself"; for guys it seems to be much more of an embarrassment than a choice. Why is it OK to ask "why" someone is a virgin, but not OK to ask "why" someone isn't. Why no one talks about it, and virgins in their 20s who aren't necessarily waiting for anything feel like it has to be a secret.

Virginity and sexuality are not commodities. The 'V' word shouldn't be shunned, because if it's horrific to shame people for their choices to have sex and dress in a sexual manner, then it's just as bad to have people feel shamed and embarrassed for not having sex or dressing in that way. Let's reclaim Virginity in the same way that we're reclaiming Slut. Because they're both big issues, so neither should be ignored in favour of the other.

Workplace bullying

At the moment, there is a case going through the Victorian courts in regards to workplace bullying, wherein the family of one teenager who was seriously bullied is pushing for a change in the laws that would make bullying a crime. This is all well and good, but now an employers' group is questioning the necessity of changing the legislation on the basis of one case (which you can read about here). The triggering case to begin with was the suicide of a 19 year old waitress, Brodie Panlock, who was seriously bullied by her coworkers. The business in question was later fined around AUD$300 000 for this. The proposed changes to the Crimes Act would mean that workplace bullies could face up to ten years in prison.

As much as Brodie Panlock's story is horrendously sad, I'm actually inclined to side with those opposed to changing the legislation. Let's face it, bullying is already a delicate and difficult issue for employers to deal with, and by introducing stricter laws, it veers towards impossible for employers and business owners to deal with this kind of situation without involving the law.

I am also of the opinion that quite often, it is within the power of the victim to remove themselves. There are places both within their own workplaces and at a higher level where the bullying activities can be reported; if they don't feel comfortable with that, then as adults they have the ability to remove themselves from their job. Australia's job market is not currently in the position where, if choosing to leave one job, they will find it impossible to become re-employed. I am not saying this condone the actions of the bullies or to put their actions on the shoulders of the victims. But jobs are not necessarily permanent, and really - at what cost stay?

I will just reiterate: I do not want to trivialise Brodie Panlock's story. It is incredibly sad that a young woman got to the point where she did not think that she had any other options, and my heart goes out to her family. It's just that I can't help but feel that perhaps her death could also be attributed to an underlying mental illness, that was triggered by the bullying. Maybe, in cases such as this, more time could be spent into removing the taboo around mental illnesses such as depression that can lead people to make decisions to end their lives, rather than changing laws and removing any control the business owner or manager may have had.

Wow. So it has definitely been a while since I've come on here. I thought I'd forgotten my password, and then got distracted by my exchange in Sheffield (which was awesome), then rediscovering Tumblr and signing up for Twitter (which I thought was vastly overrated, but now I find strangely addictive). The world is a different place now... for one thing, I have my driver's licence now, and Australia officially has the carbon tax. Gruen Transfer is back on our TVs. I have learned about fandoms and seen them close-up (scary). And we've jumped from Twilight to Hunger Games and now (creepily) onto Fifty Shades of Grey. It's actually on this that I want to write a bit about today.

I have absolutely no opposition to erotic fiction. Not specifically talking from personal experience, I just think that it's an incredibly underrated way to get "in the mood". It's more subtle and portable than videos of the same thing, and apparently it's good for the imagination. And if it's really bad, it's really funny. The thing about erotica though, is that (and maybe I'm just a prude) I think it should be more private than anything else. So while I think it's great (in a way) that E. L. James's book is topping the best seller lists, at the same time, I'm a bit uncomfortable. Not because of the book itself - which I haven't read yet, but am expecting to be morish and awful in a good way - but because people are just so open about reading it.

On Facebook, I have a couple of hundred friends. Most of them are people around my age, who I know from school, work, travels, uni, friends and bfs/gfs of my friends. I also have some younger people (cousins etc) and some older people (from work, and more cousins). It's maybe 50/50 male:female, if I were to take a guess. What does this have to do with Fifty Shades of Grey? Well. What I find weird, is that many of the bracket of women who are older than me are openly admitting to reading it. And then writing statuses about it. And broadcasting it to the whole world. While I haven't read the book, I know exactly what it's about and what it involves, and now I feel like I have waaaaaay too much insight into the sex lives of the mums and wives who would otherwise keep quiet about it. I know that it's a really sexy book. But I don't need to know who is reading it, where or why... and I really don't need to know what they think about Christian Grey. It's icky. Mind you, I guess it's kind of like telling people that you're trying for a baby - you're really just telling people that your sex life is incredibly active for a while.

Maybe I am just not as sexually liberated as some of the people I know in their online lives. But I wouldn't want to tell my married coworker that I'm reading erotic fiction for fun. I feel that by doing that, you're kind of missing the point - being open is all well and good, but really, isn't most of the appeal in that it's illicit, that you're involved in something really juicy and secret? Maybe I'm overanalysing, and it's not creepy at all. But I just feel like now I know too much.

Also... apparently a movie is in the works. I don't know if it's the kind of thing that will be allowed to get cinematic release, but also, even if/when I do read it, I don't know if I'll want a most likely censored version of the novel...