August 23, 2010 / feminism, Sexism, Unity

“Ho’s” everywhere but it ain’t Christmas

by

The opinions expressed herein are those of the author, and not necessarily those of The New Agenda.

Women in their 20s are enjoying sex in ways past generations have never known:  casual encounters, one night stands, internet sex, and even the ever-so-eloquently-named “f*** buddy,” this being a person that is there for the singular reason of sex, with no strings/ emotions/ feelings attached. Women in their 20s are enjoying pure unadulterated sex. Women are taking control of their sexuality and becoming equal and active partners in sexual rendezvous with men. We are assuming the dominant roles that men have asserted for centuries and are applauded for. Who doesn’t like a man who is strong, self-assured and sexually confident? Now, who doesn’t like a woman with the same qualities? Unfortunately, more than you think.

lipstickIn theory it sounds great, right? Women knowing what they want and grabbing life by the balls (no pun intended…okay, maybe it was intended). But, in reality, when women start speaking openly about their sexuality and sexual conquests, chances are pretty high that, sooner rather than later, someone is going to turn to the person beside them and smugly label that beautiful, confident woman a “ho.” Is that all it takes to be a ho? Sleep with multiple partners and have fun doing so? And the men having multiple sexual liaisons are…studs? Boys being boys?

As more and more young women become financially independent, they are allowed greater freedom in their concepts of dating and relationships. A woman can take care of herself. She can pay her bills (and that incredible pair of Christian Louboutin) without a man supporting her. This is quickly becoming the new status quo. In previous generations, society told women it was their station in life to act submissive so that a man will find you attractive and he will marry you and subsequently take care of you, which allowed for a conscious and subconscious male dominance where the men call the shots in the relationship.

Today, my generation is strutting into their offices in their power suits and placing their chai lattes on the same conference table as their male peers. This financial independence leaks over into their personal lives. We are not willing to be submissive anymore; we say what we want when it comes to relationships and sex. And we’re not afraid to admit that we have sex drives and wants and needs, just like our male counterpoints. Unlike the generations before us when sex was whispered about, we’re more open to experimenting with our bodies and to talking about it openly. Ladies shared pie recipes to better their homemaker skills and diaper rash remedies to become better mommies; why shouldn’t we also share sex stories to have happier, more fulfilling sex lives? I’d don’t know about you, but I’d rather good sex over good pie.

Let me state for the record that I do not like the word “ho”, but as a result of other women and men confusing empowered, confident, sexual women with “ho” I feel obligated to clear things up. So, I hereby deem myself the authority of all that is HO.

I suppose the easiest example of a “ho” to pass judgment on would be a woman that objectifies her body by appearing almost naked in a music video or appears on magazine covers/red-carpets with barely any clothes. This is a woman that is allowing herself to be seen by the world as only a sexual object. But this is not a time to judge this woman; on the contrary, it’s a time to help her. This “ho” is a woman that is not confidant with her body and her sex, despite the outward appearance. This is a woman that does not understand that she is more than just a body. This is a woman who is not so unlike the housewives from older generations. Sure, she’s trading her apron for a g-string, but she’s still in the same submissive sexual position.  Once this “ho” understands that she is more valuable than what she is promoting by objectifying her body she will reach new levels of success and will become a great influence for younger girls to come.    In the meantime why are we labeling her a ho for grinding on a pole in a music video, but we all want to dance all night long to the (typically male) singer whose video it is? Why is there always a double standard?

What really gets under my skin is that men and woman are so quick to call a woman who is sleeping with more than one man a ho.  When did it become instant ho behavior if a woman had more than one sexual partner?  When did enjoying sex for the pure pleasure of it become ho behavior?  Why can’t we be called, like our male counterparts, a “player” for having more than one partner?  Does our sex not qualify as equal to the men?  Why is it when I see a young man walking down the street with his pants down showing the world his boxers is he seen as either being “cool” or an out and out fool, but, if a woman’s undergarments show either accidentally or on purpose, that automatically makes her a ho? Why are women’s underwear overly sexualized and men’s not?

But, I digress. Can we all just agree that sex is great and can be enjoyed by both males and females? Can we stop with the whole “ho” label for women who do the same thing as men? This is not about promoting mass orgies in the streets; or objectifying one’s body; it’s about utilizing our power of sex and understanding the pleasure of physical intimacy.