Searching for non-grey-A/demisexual women in media

[sabotabby]

So I accidentally-except-not-really made fengi aware of demisexuals on Tumblr and discussion ensued. literarity made an interesting comment:

May be wishful thinking and hyperbole on my part but how dope would it be if a lot of this kind of argument was "merely" a backlash against an oversexed media by teenagers who have been exposed much earlier than we were to the vocabulary of sex & gender politics?

Which made me happy for a few minutes but then I was on my way to work and another thought occurred to me. It's this: Demisexual describes the sexual orientation of nearly every female character in popular culture that I can think of. I am actually wracking my brain for an example of a female character in media for a younger audience who is shown:

a) Having sex outside of the context of a long-term, monogamous, romantic relationship, and
b) Not being punished by the narrative for it.

I mean, granted I don't watch all that much telly (well, I do, but it's usually HBO stuff and the standards are different), or read much kid lit, and maybe it's just a genre thing, but if I think about the characters that the teenage girls I know could conceivably think of as role models—the Bella Swans and the Katniss Everdeens and the Alison Argents—they are all, as far as I can tell from an audience perspective, only attracted to men they want to be in a long-term, monogamous, romantic relationship with. And when I think of the counter-examples—Faith Lehane, Inara, that one time Buffy had a one-night stand—they're all punished for their transgressions in ways ranging from heartbreak to season-long comas.

So, can you argue that demisexual is a marginalized sexual identity when it's so reinforced in popular culture? Or am I wrong about just how hypersexualized kid media is or is not?

I should add that I'm in no way interested in policing anyone else's sexuality, and everyone ought to be free to identify however they like, obviously. But in response to Tumblr discussions wherein demisexuality is referred to as a site of oppression, I am wondering whether a sexual identity/orientation can be both celebrated by the dominant culture and marginalized.

Comments

[dagibbs.livejournal.com]

Do we have to stick to media for younger audiences? I'm having trouble coming up with examples in any media. Ok., not completely impossible, but still very very rare.

[sabotabby]

If I expand to stuff aimed at older people, I can think of Janette on Treme, who has no interest in a long-term relationship with anything other than her restaurant but still likes to have sex with humans, several characters on Game of Thrones (Ros, Osha, and presumably Dany at some point next season if they stick to the books), several comic book characters (Tank Girl and Jenny Sparks come immediately to mind, but that's because I <3 them), and then I'm into actual proper literature or relatively obscure stuff.

[springheel-jack.livejournal.com]

Well, I guess you could argue that the root of the oppression of women for their sexual behavior is the very 'virgin/whore' dichotomy, which is inscribed at the root of the understanding of women's sexuality. That would imply that one can't /really/ be either one in a genuinely free way, even 'virgin', because you're still trapped in that vicious whipsaw. It constrains you and tracks you, and then, if you want to change, you have to step off a cliff.

I'm a little puzzled by it because it's such a hoary category, though. I mean, what I thought we learned from things like transsexual identity is that "identity" as a category is pretty fungible, not to say broken. It's all new essentialisms. "I figured out what I /really/ was, then what I /really really/ was..." I certainly have no reason to do anything but celebrate when someone arrives at the realization that they are gay or trans or demi or what have you...but on what does this "really" rest? I think it rests on nothing but an ideological function. Or, to borrow a bit from Judy Butler, they're things we enact. Where I think demisexuals, and everyone else, has a point, is that it should be perfectly fine to just say "this is what I am doing now" for all 'x' where 'x' is an sex, sexuality, or gender category.

It's going to take us a long time to catch up with that, though, now that we've realized that gender and sexuality are not just a continuum but a mobile fluid. We'll have to quit doing things like tracking gender as a legal category, for one thing, because it's not static.

People used to have one career. I think in the future many people will have more than one gender. Many will have more than two at different times. There will likely be more than two genders.

[sabotabby]

Where I think demisexuals, and everyone else, has a point, is that it should be perfectly fine to just say "this is what I am doing now" for all 'x' where 'x' is an sex, sexuality, or gender category.

Absolutely. This isn't what I'm seeing on Tumblr, though; it's more "x is what I am, forever and immutably, and it's akin to y's struggles, and if you have an issue with that, you're oppressing me." If it were merely self-identification, I wouldn't waste a pixel thinking about it.

It's going to take us a long time to catch up with that, though, now that we've realized that gender and sexuality are not just a continuum but a mobile fluid. We'll have to quit doing things like tracking gender as a legal category, for one thing, because it's not static.

And washrooms that are divided into toilet stalls and urinal stalls, because it makes sense on a pragmatic level as well as a socio-political one and it's only hangups around a binary conception of gender that results in the silliness we have now.

[rinue.livejournal.com]

I kind of get what they're feeling, because there's a certain righteous narrative that if you're really self-actualized you should be happy alone but you also hear that if your sex drive isn't pushing you that you're probably not getting anything done. (That whole libido thing.) So you could possibly stretch that into feeling pressured to be no-strings-attached sexual specifically to show that you're liberated and not oppressed by patriarchy. But by and large, this "we're oppressed" bit just sounds like whining to me. You're attracted to whoever you're in love with? And you're attracted to them because you love them, so it doesn't change as they get older, and you don't have a desire to cheat on them, and you can date people without even having to consider what they look like? Sounds so hard.

Arguably, I myself would by their definition be a demisexual, because I've never gotten much of anything out of casual hookups, and when I get turned on by, say, seeing somebody really hot, it makes me want badly to have sex with my husband. I'm very sexually active when I'm in a relationship, but when I'm not seeing anybody, that part of me mostly switches off while I focus on other stuff. I'd feel like something was wrong if I hadn't had sex in a year if I was in a relationship; I wouldn't feel the same way if I wasn't.

I would not consider myself to be remotely oppressed and would also not rank any of this as a sexual identity. It feels like more of an emergent behavior, which I have specifically not changed because it seems to function really well for me: I only want what I have! And it fits easily with the dominant social/legal system. What's better than that? So in summary I'm pretty much with you on being skeptical about this being a marginalized identity.

[sabotabby]

I also get being a late bloomer, and being socially awkward, and insecure, which I think describes a lot of the more defensive folks. And, you know, most of fandom.

[firinel.livejournal.com]

I don't have enough brain atm to address the other issues, but I DID think of Katsa, from Kristen Cashmore's Graceling

[sabotabby]

Never heard of it. Any good?

[audrawilliams.livejournal.com]

I think Girls has a lot of that, and actually New Girl had some, too.

[sabotabby]

Yeah, those tend to be the sorts of shows I'm completely unaware of.

[cdaae.livejournal.com]

Huh, had never heard of this before.

I should add that I'm in no way interested in policing anyone else's sexuality, and everyone ought to be free to identify however they like, obviously. But in response to Tumblr discussions wherein demisexuality is referred to as a site of oppression, I am wondering whether a sexual identity/orientation can be both celebrated by the dominant culture and marginalized.

Yeah, I agree. I can see how people could feel marginalized within particular settings or groups (if there is peer pressure not to be such a "prude" or something), but in terms of society at large? Eh. Not so much.

I have a friend who fits the description of demisexuality, though I don't think she's ever heard the word or thought about it as an orientation. She's a lesbian, and physically disabled, and those are the things she's experienced oppression and prejudice over, not her lack of interest in one night stands or only feeling sexual towards people she has deep feelings of connection with.

[sabotabby]

Yeah, I agree. I can see how people could feel marginalized within particular settings or groups (if there is peer pressure not to be such a "prude" or something), but in terms of society at large? Eh. Not so much.

Exactly. And the former seems worse (because, well, friends are more intimate than society) until you've experienced the latter.

[whichferdinand.livejournal.com]

Kaylee?

[sabotabby]

Kaylee, right. She would count.

[smhwpf.livejournal.com]

Roz from Frasier. Jadzia Dax from DS9. Robin from How I Met Your Mother. But these are definitely the exception rather than the rule. Though they are all within the narrower category of "women who will happily have sex with someone they don't have a really strong emotional connection with" (and who are not punished by the plot for it), rather than "Women who can be sexually attracted to someone they don't have a strong emotional connection with, but would only actually have sex once there is such a connection". I think you'd get a lot more there, though it's less clear because if they don't act on it then it's not really a significant part of the story.

But it is an extremely common trope that women need to be convinced that there is a deep emotional connection and that there is going to be a serious monogamous relationship before they will have sex. See Buffy's one night stand, or virtually every one of Barney's conquests in How I Met Your Mother. He's not interested in women who would be happy to have a one night stand, it's only fun if he has to trick them into bed.

However, I think to be a demisexual man would be quite marginalizing. Possibly a woman too if it were real life rather than pop culture. If it was actually as strong as being incapable of experiencing sexual attraction without having first established a very deep relationship. I don't know.

[sabotabby]

However, I think to be a demisexual man would be quite marginalizing. Possibly a woman too if it were real life rather than pop culture. If it was actually as strong as being incapable of experiencing sexual attraction without having first established a very deep relationship. I don't know.

Oh, I agree. And on a personal level, it is quite marginalizing for a woman. (I remember one girl in high school who, we found out, had never masturbated or even thought of doing it, and how shocking that was to us. I mean, we weren't dicks about it, but it was probably embarrassing for her to realize that, of our group of friends, she was the only one for whom this was true.) But on a societal level, it fits very well with the expectations for women but not the expectations for men.

[agatharuncible.livejournal.com]

I have really mixed feeling about the "demisexual" label, I feel like I don't really know about it enough to have a big opinion. But maybe the reason why people are upset that it's not represented in the media when it apparently is is that it's not uniform across the board -- I can't think of many male characters who fit that label who aren't portrayed as geeky (nothing wrong with being geeky, but that's not very diverse). I think it's also the fact that for proponents of the label, there's a difference between being demisexual because that's how you feel, and behaving in a way that is superficially similar because of society.

(I also feel like I don't know that much about the kind of thing that teenagers watch and read, because I don't really like that stuff, so I only know about certain fandoms from the Internet. What about some of the girls on Gossip Girl? Probaly not Blair, but Serena has sex -- at least it is implied that she does -- with several guys over the course of the show and she is rarely punished for it via tropes like pregnancy or STI scares; when she is "punished" it's usually because of things other than the sex itself, or because of the way this is seen by the other characters. Her sex life isn't really depicted in a negative light, and the only time I can think of when it's A Bad Thing is when she has sex with her best friend's boyfriend which is more about the dynamics of their friendship than anything.)

[agatharuncible.livejournal.com]

I forgot to add:

I am wondering whether a sexual identity/orientation can be both celebrated by the dominant culture and marginalized

I don't know either. The only thing that comes to mind are straight women -- celebrated because ~yay straight, but also marginalized because ~women actually enjoying sex and not being passive objects imagine that (especially when it intersects with other factors as well). But that's probably not what you were asking about and I should go because my painkillers are wearing off haha.

By the way, do you have a tumblr? I want to follow you!

[beam-oflight.livejournal.com]

Bo from Lost girl? She is a succubus though and sometimes accidentally kills people having sex, but on the whole I think her sexuality is presented fairly positively. Starbuck also has a bunch of on night stands in bsg.

[sabotabby]

Bo came up in fengi's post, but I'm not sure how much of a subversion that she is. She kills people with sex, and only stops killing people with sex once the prospect of a long-term romantic relationship presents itself.

[fengi.livejournal.com]

Holly Hunter from Saving Grace almost makes it as spends much of the series being casually sexual in a way male leads in other edgy cops shows are, including most of her romantic interest being eye candy actors much younger than herself. Alas Grace also has a troubled past that informs her present in a somewhat predictable way and there's the whole angel thing which is interesting until the third season where they seemed to have no idea how to bring the high concept to an end and veered into flailing symbolic nonsense, like Lost with Whiskey. Holly Hunter is like a tiny American Helen Mirren in terms of confident older sexuality, though.

[sabotabby]

Hmm. Is it like Touched By an Angel? Because that was terrible.

[mendaciloquent.livejournal.com]

Zoe Barnes from House of Cards comes to mind. What negative consequences this character endures as a result are more or less self-conscious within the show, at least so far. Though I wouldn't call this a kid show, so it doesn't really count.

[sabotabby]

House of Cards: Worth watching?

[rohmie.livejournal.com]

So I accidentally-except-not-really made fengi aware of demisexuals

And now I am aware of them as well.

[sabotabby]

Sorry! I am a bad person that way.

[nichtsda.livejournal.com]

Okay, until I read the link, I thought a demisexual was, like myself, a person who can enjoy and has enjoyed sex outside of a relationship but typically prefers to have sex within an emotional relationship, for whatever reason. I've had casual and non-regrettable rolls with people while not in a relationship, but I really enjoy sex most when I know I'll be totally comfortable and will possibly have a good conversation with the other party when we're done. In that case, I wouldn't see that as a marginalized or unacceptable position at all.

This sounds more like an asexual person who could develop or has developed a sex drive exclusively for another person after forming an emotional relationship. In which case, I could see that identity being subject to the same perceptions, misunderstandings and suspicions as those who identify as asexual. There probably are those for whom this identity is a way of coping with anxieties about having sex -- I was horny all throughout my teens and yet when my chance to have sex finally arrived, I got nervous and didn't do it. It wasn't about being loved but about the reality that someone was going to stick part of their body into mine and oh my god, will it hurt, will I bleed, am I going to have an orgasm, does he know how to put on the condom the right way, are we going to leave the lights on, does he expect me to [multiple actions], am I going to start giggling when I see his dick and be unable to stop?

Or maybe this is a way for people who are currently asexual to encourage a "sexual" to not pass on the possibility of a relationship with them, because they could come around if the conditions are right. I admit that, in theory, I can't see myself wanting to get in a relationship with someone who identifies as asexual unless I had a full understanding of their personal boundaries. Maybe this is a way of saying they're not against affection or cuddling naked and, who knows, maybe if you're the right person, you can get with them.

I don't know. I'm speaking about people that I don't personally know, since this isn't something I've ever seen among my friends. I've had two hook-ups that turned into years-long relationships so maybe I'm a demiromantic person? I dunno.

I think a lot of female fictional characters have been demisexual because of bad ideas that won't go away like the ol' virgin/whore dichotomy; women only ever hump for love; and (non-slutty) women don't really enjoy sex -- it's just something they do for their men. Also a lot of media, especially most TV shows, are turned out quickly, so writers don't take or have the time to develop a really nuanced, true-to-life, complex character. Especially on network TV here, it's still only recent that characters can even be depicted as having sex or even talking about it openly. The golden age of writing sex for TV has a ways to go.

[sabotabby]

This sounds more like an asexual person who could develop or has developed a sex drive exclusively for another person after forming an emotional relationship. In which case, I could see that identity being subject to the same perceptions, misunderstandings and suspicions as those who identify as asexual.

I still don't think that this is socially unacceptable. Witness traditions of courting that social commentators seem nostalgic for, or the no-sex-before-marriage crowd, which is huge.

Like I said, I don't want to judge anyone's identity, but I wonder at the marginalization of it on a broader scale than the personal.