Monday, January 6, 2014

Defining the Undefinable: Virginity as a Social Construct

                I’ve been watching The Carrie Diaries lately and while it’s an enjoyable and cute show, I can’t help but notice the annoying emphasis they place on virginity. So let’s talk about virginity and, more importantly, how it isn’t actually a thing.
                First of all, how do we classify a virgin? The typical definition is someone who has never engaged in sexual intercourse – usually referring to the penile-vaginal variety. Now maybe you already picked up on how heteronormative and heterosexist that is, but if not, let me explain. Let’s say a girl realizes from a relatively young age that she doesn’t want to have sex with boys, but rather with fellow women. She goes through life only engaging in sexual activity with women, lacking penile penetration. While she meets the definition, is she really what we’d consider a virgin? The same goes for male same-sex couples. Or people who engage in a lot of sexual activity but without “going all the way.”
                How about some historical context? In the past, virginity was used to determine the worthiness of a bride, her purity. While social class determined the importance of bridal virginity, the universal reality was that virgins were better than non-virgins. Sounds pretty outdated, right? Wrong. We can still see society’s concern with virginity through other socially constructed terms like “slut” and “prude.” Virginity is both prized and abhorred. We may not use it to determine worth in the same way, but we’re still obsessed with it.
                And now we’ve reached the inevitable point where I point out the misogyny in it. Looking at the past, you literally can’t deny that the “virginity=purity” idea almost exclusively affected women. Pre-marital sex was frowned upon for everyone, yes, but men weren’t considered less pure afterward. That idea still exists today. Can we talk about the imagery of “popping the cherry?” Does that sound pleasant to anyone? Can we talk about how we stress to girls that their first time is going to hurt (even though it REALLY SHOULDN’T) and that it needs to be special? In The Carrie Diaries, the main character talks about her thoughts on losing her virginity and the main focus was “Will it hurt?” “Will I feel different after?” As a girl, I can confirm “Did it hurt?” is one of the first questions commonly asked when a friend says they had sex for the first time. And it’s completely normal. We’ve trained girls to believe it’s supposed to hurt and more importantly, we’ve trained boys that it’s okay to hurt us.
                What else do we teach guys? That they need to make the girl’s first time special. Because they’re just sex machines, right? Girls are the only ones with emotional attachments so a guy just has to respect that. We tell girls that if they don’t “lose it” with the right guy, they’ll regret it, and sometimes they do. But would it happen as often if we as a society didn’t stress the importance of your first time?
                Would we be a better society if we didn’t try to sort the world into “virgins” and “non-virgins?” If we acknowledged that it’s impossible to do that? What if we let go of a term with a sexist history that has no modern relevance? If we taught guys that no, ripping the hymen is not required with initiation into the world of sexual intercourse? What if we stopped preaching that the first time should be with someone special, and connecting sex exclusively with love?
                Would we live in a better world?

                Of course.

Stay rad, pals.

No comments:

Post a Comment