the thing about penis vs orifice is that men generally look at our bodies as a collection of holes to stick their thing in. any opening is interpreted as designed To Fit A Dick In It. anal. "spitroasting". "facefucking". its why they want to gouge our eyes out and then fuck our eye sockets. hole = dick hugger and warmer and stimulator.
and the thing about acts like "blowjobs" and "handjobs" is right in the name: it is a service rather than a mutual act. men don't give women "fingerjobs" or "tonguejobs". but they have a dick that you gotta service. a handjob will be performed in a car. a blowjob will be performed under the desk. you are not having sex, the woman is performing a task on the male organ that needs sucking and rubbing and licking if the man is to be content and satisfied.
none of these things are Biologically Inherent, but: when "penis vs orifice" as a cultural script is built off the fact that the penis protrudes and the orifice caves in, and when the very language we use to talk about specific acts betrays implications of female service and male pleasure, i think it is misguided to say that true progress will be achieved when fellatio and cunnilingus are treated as fundamentally the same. "as long as it's mutual" to me is an example of liberalism as opposed to liberation
and Ultimately individual personal enjoyment of any act should not be the first thing factored in when someone says "something about this act feels wrong / bad / degrading". when a woman perceives a facet of sexual degradation of women, our focus should be on giving her the language to understand and analyse it. personal experiences can be considered and explored, but first a politically minded framework needs to be established, so that her instinctive perceptions could be firmly grounded in our collective consciousness. this is a conversation that needs expanding, not shutting down



















