dead to me

*bear with me, dear readers; for if i don’t get the draft version of this post out > it’ll be the end of me. Seriously: I’m DONE agonising over it.

I’ll further fill it it out with the art references. but so far, simply tell me:

AM i carrying a point across as to ^why all sexuality _ is a negative force?^


My ideological pet peeve is thus:






In the middle of writing this – I came to a nuclear realisation :

chi  = is not hoodoo-woodoo hippie BS. We really must be balanced to be content!

All these overwhelming, needy cravings that we develop ( for erotics; touch; grand unconditional love as solving everything; consumerism) are there…..

because this mental world makes us unbalanced, feeling like shit & therefore craving too much of just 1 puzzle piece, when  feeling good only works when the puzzle pieces fit together!!!!!!

This is where addiction comes from !^^^^^^^^^^^^^Whoa!! slapping myself on head here………………………………!


…..which leads me onto this craving~ because i’m just so impossibly tired of people not seeing thru  why    getting ur jollies   is elevated stupidly high &in a complete undeserved way to serve men’s purpose. I’m puritannically & emphatically over  (what I term) vulvae-gazing; .. going on in ALL fractions of Womens’ LiB.

Sex, without exception, is at the core of all our oppression_down to genetic level. The 2nd Wave became split (by male manipulation )along the false line of Sex = Loyalty=Life Satisfaction. When in reality: female ‘sexuality’ varies only along the spectrum of its’ evolved adaptation to rape <<stemming back to our ape ancestors’ + response to Pavlovian conditioning. Femonade was dead on about this:


“Women need to be liberated FROM sex – not BY it”









Alas: Males handed down the diktat – that it is not to BE.

Notice how there’re no parades for Spinsters? No same-sex platonic marriage? Sex-less sensuality?? No coming-out ceremony for being an anti-natalist-man-hater-hell_bent on female solidarity_ affection_and_ destruction_of nuclear_family (aka Prude)???

#Asexuality only became *grudgingly* accepted about 3 mins ago. There’s all of 1(!) recorded case of female friends as co-parents, – in Britain



I really dig this stance:

But NOT the author’s racial stance^


And here’s a fine piece of body horror:

For i sincerely don’t believe  sexuality  to be a positive force. Ain’t nothing but a bunch of reproductive hormones  holding us hostage – on a male-bred schedule. There is a reason why they used to be called base urges

And they definitely are that – because they operate while we’re fertile , and sometimes spike up in 2nd trimester. For the vast duration of female-kind’s existence we weren’t horny @ all – as we were perpetually knocked up , or breast-feeding. Many of our kind still are. Childbirth destroys whichever nerve endings we ever possess internally & can produce external damage too. In some mothers, libido switches off entirely after reproducing __ as it’s now fulfilled it’s purpose.

Personally : I detest existing a highly sexed being. I get hit by these dreaded hormones twice in my cycle * like clockwork* and inevitably end up doing, reading  & watching things I don’t want to be doing, reading  & watching !

They waste my time; they waste my energy; they waste my $, exec. function, icky factor +nerves I can ill -afford this in my state, but they were still a problem when I was healthier.

I’ve led a life skirting asexuality, so that’s avoided a solid 97.7 % of the harm doled out on our brethren via Sexy Sex, i reckon. But the rest’s been bad enough.

Because all that partnered genital contact – gap’s been filled by :

wondering why on earth i can’t climax like a normal woman (mechanics’re there , explosive pleasure – not so much…))





formerly continuously performing a taboo I won’t confess to on _ on my grave ( it didn’t harm anyone..)

being pushed into limited male contact_ i absolutely hated @ some point

figuring out what the hell am sexually (cause aspies have funny sexualities, apparently _ hetero programmin’ never clicked}


inducing irritation, soreness & minor bleeding ( enough to freak me out]

social embarassment over not fulfilling my role as a prodding hole for males & the modesty trap

& last, but not least,

reading some terrible writing!….L-)

acquiring perverse & useless devices

body OCD & femmy self-punishment over having it + resentment

acute anxiety

longing jealousy for all those lucky sex-getters

lowering of standards

feeling like a male-possession overtakes me during PMS hormonal flood

feeling crappy about the whole shebang chemically + mentally

experiencing hormonal coersion : like i’m dragged by the collar & have to let it out to go back to being ME

male celebrity obsessions  <before I slayed the het dragon


chasing down the Philosopher’s Stone of stimulating, non-misogynistic material

^^^^All this I was ought to do< if i simply wanted to sleep & get on with life!!!!


overall, i derived only 2 positive effects from my sex maniac-hormonal make-up:

1)Release warmed my feet & let out intolerable anxiety produced by illness

2)Fantasy served as a distraction during cancer treatment

^^^^^This is exactly my point. That u must be in a state of intolerable discomfort   to undertake such strange activity (involving bits that pass excrement & are awfully sensitive for frequent fiddling)


In the middle of all this I had a blissfull couple of months, when an anti-depressant made me sexless. Freaking wonderful > I tell ya’…

The 1 time I experienced overwhelming desire> it scared me. It was like being drunk & I  really don’t like that feeling.  It was equal parts [pleasurable thrill + cold sweat thrill]^ It also felt sorta cannibalistic …like i wanted to consume the object. Clearly I’m not the only one ~ as vampirism = sexual metaphor. After all : being in heat isn’t a pleasant experience for female animals (think about pleasure resulting from drives contextually. Meaning: that questionable high only exists to let out the tension of the drive}

The reason it felt so intense < stems from us – females living in a fishbowl of pleasure & passion -deprivation + aforementioned unbalance

We live in a world of males sucking JOy & wonder out of everything _ like Dementors. WE’re also badly Stockholmed & prone to eroticising attention from our captor. I sincerely don’t know that what I crave IS eros, and not a desperate feeling of  wanting to feel alive in SOME form.


I’ll now come to the dreaded task of slaying the sacred cow:

of taking males out of the equation….

Well, it’s certainly a least worst option. If sexuality absolutely must exist> we should all be in merry sacred cow congress – either with ourselves or other females.

But MUST it exist? Is it worth it? In it’s absolute best form, it still swallows up sensuality with croc jaws & doesn’t allow the non-sexual form to exist;

it still follows a pattern of hormonal drugging ( the honeymoon stage is all about getting u knocked up quickly > to escape extra male rapey violence in estrus; & those hormones still perform their programming between women -by default)

it irritates genitalia

& most bitterly & heart-breakingly of all …

…it divides us Like. Crazy. I wanna weep everytime the non|Sapphic divide comes up & determines our whole lives & our feminism in separate camps. I wanna scream: “They’re just genitals with rich nerve endings, people! Rub them like a genie lamp & get on with life & our liberation! Or just get on anti-depressants for the sexless affect ( those things’re useless for everything else)”

For as long as this sorry mess continues:

!) The bulk of women & girls shall remain in the state of acute touch & affection deprivation from each other  – since it’s all been deemed erotic in recent times


“Being someone who thinks heterosexuality in women is a sign of insanity in patrirachy, the whole thing is a sad commentary on women’s servitude to PIV.

^ this is a comment by Sheila G from Femonade.


Whistle as u read, and Take a thought experiment with me:

***what IF we accorded the same social importance to….

toileting? I mean: there are some pleasurable poos out there,…



I’ve wondered in my previous post# as to where the line lies? At what point does  sensual become  sexual?

Well, it’s the hormones that determine that. Whatever stimulation u give to urself in the middle of a hormonal peak = ‘ll just feel like fun massage outside of it. That’s exactly what going solo felt like to me as a child. It had zero sexual context because the hormones weren’t present.  in fact: i don’t remember how i discovered it. but it’s highly likely that stress +chronic illness led to it.

We’ve been indoctrinated into the male experience of it because males’re always hormonal. They don’t fluctuate like we do. They don’t switch off @ menopause. This is why PIv’s redundant & painful after menopause – no hormones to drive the mating\rape adaptation response. +sexual urges overall

Lubrication is 100% rape adaptive: It happens to save ur internal organs @ inevitable forced mating. Arousal > produces lubrication. ALso – ever noticed that fear feels an  awful lot like  arousal?  Both start in the pit of ur stomach. Both’re terrifically stressful. In fact, the rollercoaster analogy applies to both aptly: “Terror> swearing u;ll never do it again> flood of feel-good hormones> yay, I’ll go again!> unpleasant come-down ”


Unfinished art references

Onegin: “End this torment.

Dead to Me: Go watch this show. It’s the gift I never dreamt Netflix shall deliver & wrap – a platonic female life-partnership|love plot, which follows traditional romance lines, but never, Ever (!!) veers into a smidgeon of sex.

_I also deem that 1-on -1 partnerships’re very much designed to be claustrophobic ^# which the series does address.

yellow dead end sign during day time
Photo by Pixabay on


CRE wrote about men deliberately making XX-possessors sick enough to ‘want’ males. <

…but it’s a tricky balance ; ‘ cos we can’t be made too sick.  when you’re as incapacitated ( for performing MANdated life tasks) as i’ve been for most of my existence & hence autistic , something really bonzer happens:

{still working on this…










70 thoughts on “dead to me

  1. Yuck!! Dead To Me is a pathetically het melodrama. Oh, well, sticking around to watch some Nature documentaries. Last chance before Mass Extinction. (Thanks to the Y-chromo Humin-geno)


      1. Hi CRE! I follow this website: for extinction stuff now, and recommend it to others. It’s a daily roundup of all the terrible climate and economic news from around the planet. It’s posted on facebook too, but the web roundup gives brief intros and then links to the particular disasters. Stuff that doesn’t get the attention of mainstream news outlets.

        Crop failures are ahead because of flooding and droughts. When food prices turn up sharply, there’s gonna be even more gun-play on the streets. :/

        This stuff preys on my mind a lot. I want to be off the planet before food prices go berserk. Want to hear birds singing in the evening, know peace and beauty, and then not have to wake up in the morning. How are you?

        Liked by 1 person

  2. Standardly: this plot’d be done with a man & woman, who shall fall tots in lurve, despite the man lying – and the woman’ll be all forgiveness after some super sexy times


  3. I’ve long learnt to juice material around the compulsory het propaganda. So it’s earth-shattering to hear:”U don’t need a dude , or be a single mum. We’ll be a mothering team!” That’s tasty juice to me

    Liked by 2 people

    1. Being a single mother (okay, I’m bot really a mother. I’ve never given birth after all) is working out quite well, I think. I’m even working on taking in another girl. Of course, I’m alone, but that’s still easier than most women have it because they also have a truly worthless sack of meat they have to care for and fear.

      Liked by 1 person

  4. Hmm I don’t agree that all sexuality is a negative force, because of the existence of lesbian sexuality so… Are we only talking about heterofuckery here?


    1. Considering I haven’t engaged in any hetero-fuckery: I’m pissed about it on a fundamental level. Like -hormonally & what these hormones have done to us socially. I much prefer being sexless – like when i was on meds


  5. I’m pro-sexless sensuality + holistic female bonding. THere’s a reason that i used the word ‘sapphic’: an old-fashioned word for ‘lesbian’; – cos it doesn’t have political connotation. Otherwise radfems get into the senseless, circuitous discussion on what’s a sexual lesbian, what’s a political one, whether u can choose to be one, whether it’s necessary for our Lib, whether u can do female-love otherwise, how male-enslaved & confused’re women’re traitors ( when they’ve been selectively bred like dogs — to be enslaved & confused!)

    ….After several years of this: “Just shoot me now’…because this is exactly what males intended. This is WHY gay rights became a thing: they helped diffuse the 2nd Wave just as much as Roe vs Wade. And this is why there’re no rights for any hormone-free version of female affection & man -hating. This is how we ended up living in an ice-cube of relational deprivation, which Radical Wind wrote about. And this is how the revolution ended & heteronormativity began: I mean – Sapphics’re now routinely supporting the marriage institution (source of most female evil!) & raising dude-babies, &eagerly participating in the token torturer practice.

    And worse still:
    It solidified the hetero-monster. It gave it power, when it was faltering. In the 70s the truth about it was very clear to growing nos’ of womyn. And then…..comes along the re-branding of it as a sexy, fun destiny! Just like the gay sexy, fun destiny!

    Note that both the original kick-starters of the Wave (Solanas +Shulie F.) weren’t enamoured with erotics. Solanas deemed libido as a good idea to condition away; while Shulie dreamt of a sexless future, where reproduction is automated

    Liked by 1 person

  6. _Sonia Johnson’s pro-sexless touchy-feeliness too. Those 3’re the most rad. among the rads

    See, my point about all-round deprivation that man’s world subjects is to> is that we channel ALL of it into sexual|emotional|other intense cravings-addictions. But if we were all-round peacefully content – none of it’d feel so intense & needy

    The most pleasurable thing I ever felt: A hand-fed wild magpie looking into my eyes * letting out a long beautiful gurgle . And yet – I had no idea i wanted to experience it _until i did.

    I’ve felt overwhelming tugs towards particular girls + women my whole life—of the type of bonding craving that Sonia described in Sisterwitch Conspiracy. It’s like that magpie: I don’t KNOW what I desire, because I have no framework for it. But it’s something to do with otherwordly bonding, which hormonal-driven contact won’t give me.

    Liked by 1 person

  7. As you know, I personally have embraced my sexuality. I don’t really see it as anything like a burden or something that requires release or anything like that. Of course, my sexuality is purely about women, so that should be something quite different. I see it as a beautiful way if bonding and expression of love.

    Liked by 1 person

      1. I wouldn’t call my own perspective broad to be honest. I tend to be quite focused on those women who are the most successful in our world. It really is something I’ve been involved with since I was a girl.
        But, what I see as very important is the difference between intimacy with females and males. Women are capable of real intimacy and love, whereas males are only capable of mechanical actions. I’m very fortunate to not be attracted to those who would oppress us.


      2. I’m fortunate too: in that> I never met the benchmark of straight-ness, so it was never that much of a leap to this kind of visceral, man-averse stance of now. I clearly exist somewhere on the weak end of that rape-reaction continuum.
        Because I was always TOO ill in body & too SANE in mind. I ‘m gonna write about that in the edit.

        Liked by 1 person

      3. In fact, there wasn’t ever a time when I saw the Ys in 3D. The womyn i disliked were still fully human to me, & I remember their faces & qualities clearly.

        Men? Always in 2-D- like manequins & rarely memorable. I had 2 instances, where guys remembered me from college oR uni, While I had NO FRIGGING CLUE who they were. And these were dudes I spent extensive time in classrooms with : 1 sat behind me for 2 years!!!

        It took me forever to figure out that I don’t actually hate children — it’s just boys. The way u’re doing motherhood: is an option that’d on the table if i were healthy. I half-raised my sis. I don’t for the life of me grasp WHY wanna-be mothers put themselved thru all the fertility assistance, when there’s a world of girls needing homes out there.

        Liked by 1 person

      4. I think I understand what you mean. I however certainly wouldn’t call you weak. You might have health issues, but you do show an amazing ability to persevere and even open yourself up to the awful truth of this society.

        Liked by 1 person

      5. By broad: I mean that u don’t dismiss the deconstruction of hetero as a giant rape-stitution – which this entire world exists to hold up.

        I remember pausing @ the word ‘attracted’ actually – before rad. theory found me. Because I was never attracted to males: they were mere playthings i wanted to use & throw away (best done remotely). I was completely befuddled @ the concept of attachment to them,,,before I read about how trauma-bonding works. And that it exists across generations

        I was, however, always emotionally attracted to ladies & animals –

        Liked by 2 people

  8. Hi all. I have to second the idea that heterosexuality (to the extent it exists) is a “force” in the sense that genetics/reproduction may be THE most powerful force in the universe. Men have reduced it to a hobby or a sport. This is how unbelievably arrogant males are, not to mention either negligently or malignantly destructive or both. Is lesbian sexuality simply vestigial and related to the “het” genetics/reproductive force? Some lesbians say it’s not and I have to leave room for the possibility that they are right about that although I no longer trust women to grok reality any more than I trust anyone else to. I have to concede that it’s possible tho. That’s my 2 cents FWIW.

    As for female “sens-uality” I had the thought recently that women do seem to need to perceive things through our “sens-es” which in practice means women need to reinvent the wheel every fucking time on every fucking issue. It seems like every one of us needs to experience everything firsthand and are decidedly unable to learn from other women’s experience including the women who came before, and that includes our feminist elders who are seen as having not “gotten it” on some fundamental level that the younger women can do better. (Some lesbians do not need to experience intercourse firsthand for some reason tho, hmm). This is my observation from being involved in radical feminism for a decade by now and seeing what liberal and radical women think and how they behave. Female sensuality is certainly a thing we can’t seem to divorce ourselves from and has been used as evidence that we are sex-ual or touch-centered beings, as if touch is the only sense that exists or matters. Our seemingly innate need to experience life through our senses has been reduced to fucking, and in particular, to fucking men. That’s all I have to add at the moment. xx

    Liked by 1 person

    1. I never managed to divorce myself from innate psychic distaste for men> no matter how intently i tried to brainwash myself away from it. Or my childhood memories of erotics being a slimy, bullying pool of scum (destroying female relationships)

      So yes – i experienced those things thru my own sense – way before i read any radfem.

      Liked by 1 person

      1. And i squirmed away from drunken gal-pal sharing about intercourse. it hit me so viscerally _ that i didn’t need to extend it to experiencing. I already kinda did – 2nd hand

        Liked by 2 people

    2. The reduction (or misrepresentation): I’m really sceptical about erogenous zones

      * Take the neck: it’s sensitive cos it’s the arterial connection between brain & body. U MUST be very aware of discomfort in it – for survival
      *Next up ‘re nipples: they have milk glands & u gotta feel accurately how the baby latches on & whether they’re expressing.

      Liked by 2 people

  9. thought-provoking, as always. It’s the deprivation talking again: if u deprive us specifically of touch – they yes, we want touch like no tomorrow. But if we’re balanced and not living in a ice-cube of deprivation- well want a teensy bit of everything > to make us whole.

    All women’s horniness operates on the same reproductive cycle – this was a light-bulb for me. This is why: 1 day we’re just about ready to hump inanimate objects, and others: “Meh! who needs it?” And it’s a state that’s designed to be uncomfortable (like hunger, thirst, sleeo)> so that u attend to it


    1. It could be vestigial of parthenogenesis: whiptail lizards go thru motions of mating

      Also, we’ve talked about how chronic illness reduces our tolerance of irritants.. Well, excitement was hella more fun for me before I was seriously ill; but i was still ASD-ill always. So i’ve never experienced the sexual irritant in a healthy body – @ a level where it might be pleasurable without this level of disturbance

      Liked by 1 person

      1. Sapphic ‘acceptance” is used to chase 90%+ of females into f-ing men. The fringe reinforces the default, esp. when that fringe is carried out in default manner: marriage, babies, sex= love.

        I distinctly remember being sexually harangued by boys in HS, where they tried to get me to do them so i dont’ get branded a lesbian. My HS friend was determinedly Spinster-ish until 30 & then got chased to coupling up with the closest male(which makes her intensely depressed; quite likely due to BC) …all to avoid her parents thinking she’s gay….and she’s not even homo-phobic. It’s that mainstreaming of non-hetero was ONLY ever done —to reaffirm the hetero. Spinsterism + anti-sexualism is not tolerated.

        And now that re-affirmation goal’s carried to fruition :>> well, of course Sapphics’re being thrown under the bus with all us ladies.

        When u look @ it from that camp too: Well, no wonder that there’s so much @ stake – building on top of sex— when ur only other presented trajectory is f-ing and servicing grown male/s. No wonder that radical lesbianism as token torture~ exists. I fully grok the emotional}political stakes there.

        Liked by 1 person

  10. This post, plus your comments on my antisexualism post, have been making me think about a lot of things. I hope you won’t mind some non-linear offshoot thoughts, because that’s all I’ve got right now, but I want to (attempt to!) contribute something to the discussion.

    I definitely have more of a problem with sex than with the in-love state, because I see sexual behaviors as being a lot more destructive. Though I suppose people falling in love causes them to make irrational decisions about whom to have children with, and that probably has farther-reaching effects than I can even imagine, but it just doesn’t have the same visceral impact to me as thinking about child sexual abuse, rape, unwanted pregnancy, STDs and their consequences, prostitution, pornography, and sexual dependency and desensitization does. All of that, and for what advantage? I think people would be so much more functional, and indeed happier, and have healthier relationships, if women made selective reproductive choices to make people ultimately naturally chaste, and just eliminated all the problems of sex from the equation. This is a thought experiment I’ve given some time to before, and I still can think of literally no negative consequences that would result if people were naturally chaste.

    I do believe that the conjugal system is a product of patriarchy. I don’t see why women would be motivated to participate in such a system unless they were forced to by male control of resources; it seems natural to me for women to want to have total free control over their own reproduction, and to choose the best man around to father each of their children. Whereas I can see men being motivated to “possess” their women for themselves by enforcing sexual exclusivity to ensure legitimacy, and also being motivated to roughly evenly distribute the women amongst themselves, to prevent conflict: a sex slave in every bed, like the primitive version of “a chicken in every pot.”

    Yay, somebody who agrees with me that sex is a terrible basis for committed relationships! That’s something I definitely want for write more about, sexual normativity and the erasure of/taboos on nonsexual partnered relationships.

    I like sensuality as a concept: the emphasis on it being about the senses, and the sort of comparative contrast to the word sexuality. I think sensuality is a wonderful thing, being fully conscious and present in the world and in your body and allowing yourself to be deeply moved by the simple gifts that come with being alive. I think sensuality is real pleasure, because it’s about feeling good in reality rather than checking into an altered mental state to chase an high. There’s so much to experience outside of sexuality that gets tossed to the side as being uninteresting or unimportant, compared to the Big Kahuna that is sex. If only sensuality, as explored individually and with other people, and nonsexual relationships and affection, were celebrated in the copious, adoring detail that is given to every minutia and possible permutation of sexual relationships.

    Besides the dismissal and addictions’ denaturing of sensuality, I think there’s also a widespread thing that people do where types of nonsexual intimacy get lumped in as being inherently part of a sexual relationship when it’s really intimacy, not sex. Even a simple thing like holding hands is pretty universally assumed to mean the people holding hands must also be having sex with each other. It breaks my brain a little bit sometimes, how tangled up and confused mainstream concepts are of what falls under the umbrella of being “sexual.” To me sex is pretty straightforwardly genital contact. I feel a very clear distinction between sexual and nonsexual behavior, and even intent – when a person’s interest in me is sexual IRL it makes me extremely uncomfortable on a rather atavistic level, so I get confused by how people can conflate sexual and nonsexual intimacy when even the difference between sexual and nonsexual interest feels like night and day to me. But evidently this is different for other people.

    Like you were saying, I get the impression that when people are sexually motivated really anything can be construed as sexual and found to be sexually stimulating. Hence, in my opinion, Muslim men finding hijab inadequate to still their lusts and putting women in niqab and burqa: they’re trying to find an external cause for the sex drive that’s within themselves (and of course they blame women, as men have blamed women for their lusts since the dawn of patriarchy). For people who are not sexually motivated, total nudity is not sexual, neither is physical closeness. I think it’s a question of what’s going on inside the person, not what level of physical intimacy exists between the people. But I would guess that if people’s only experience of physical intimacy involves sex, then they come to believe that all physical intimacy necessarily has a sexual component.

    I sometimes wonder if some people (maybe most people?) are actually incapable of really loving somebody if they aren’t sexually motivated. I’ve been wondering about this because nonsexual partnered relationships between sexual people are essentially unheard of, and I don’t understand why that is – surely people must sometimes love friends or family members dearly enough to want to spend their lives together? And yet we virtually never see it – or at least I don’t. But the idea that people are incapable of real love and life-devotion without sex is so sad to me, I rather irrationally hope this isn’t true, and that it’s just so ingrained in our culture that the lynchpin of partnered relationships is sex, that people never question whether they could spend their lives with someone they didn’t want to have sex with.

    I do sometimes wonder if women’s sexuality is very different from men’s, and women have been forced to define their sexual motivations, interests, and relationships within a framework that’s fundamentally wrong. Maybe in very basic ways, like even the terms are inaccurate or poorly accurate, even down to concepts like sexual attraction, sex drive, and arousal. Men have defined human sexuality for so long, I sometimes wonder whether, if women had a blank slate and could define their sexuality on their own terms, it would be something really very different, even in the way sexual concepts and relationships are defined and discussed, maybe even in what is considered to be sexual. I’m probably not the best person to be trying to assess this sort of thing, but sometimes in reading about human sexuality I’ve gotten an “off” feeling when the same concepts that are applied to men are then copy/paste applied to women, like, “Is this really accurate? Is this really representative? Couldn’t there be a better way to talk about this? Aren’t they leaving out important things?”

    It seems like it’s become a PC thing, when discussing asexuality, to add an obligatory caveat along the lines of, “Some asexual people want to have sex and enjoy it, or are “neutral” about it and engage in it for the sake of the relationship.” I find this deeply disturbing. An asexual woman is no more motivated to have sex with a man, for example, than a lesbian is, possibly even less so since at least lesbians are oriented towards having sex at all. It would be very disturbing to treat lesbians having sex with men as “normal” and not a product of a heteronormative, patriarchal society. To normalize asexuals having sex seems to me like a type of acephobia, caused by the weight of sexual normativity that’s so heavy and all-encompassing it’s hard to even recognize it. I think the fact that asexuality is still officially a mental illness (“Hyposexuality” in the DSM-5) says a hell of a lot about what asexual, low-sexed, and sex-critical people are up against. If homosexuality is the love that dare not speak its name, I think nonsexual love is the love with no name.

    I think you are very much on to something with the idea that sexual behaviors are motivated by a lack in other areas of life, by needs that are going unmet. I think all addictive processes, including sexual behaviors, are maladaptive coping mechanisms. The research on the transferability of addictive processes (people who quit one are extremely susceptible to “picking up” another), as well as the research on oxytocin- and serotonin-promoting behaviors (affection, stress reduction, community, religious faith, anything that makes the person feel safe, loved, or simply happy) being actively antagonistic to addictive processes support this. So I am sympathetic to people who are driven to find solace in addictive processes to attempt to fill the space of unmet needs, but that doesn’t mean I think it’s an effective or low-cost method of dealing with issues.

    I don’t view sexual behaviors as a need. I view sex as an addictive process that can be fed or not; but like all addictive processes, once it gets its hooks into a person and their brain becomes dependent on the high to feel normal, then it very much feels like a need – and if it’s strong enough an overwhelming “need” at that, one that has the capacity to override people’s frontal-lobe reasoned decision-making, long-term planning and delayed gratification, and self-control. But most people don’t think of sexual behaviors as being in the same category as things like alcohol, drugs, and gambling at all, so I think a huge percentage of the population is addicted and doesn’t even recognize it, because sex addiction is so widespread in modern society as to be assumed to be normal, as just the way humans work.

    I definitely want to check out that show. I kind of obsessively collect and treasure instances in media of good family relationships and friendships, and asexual or pseudo-asexual characters. I think representation is really freakin’ important, because if we can’t even imagine what we want to be like, and what sort of relationships we want to have, it’s never going to happen – and that goes for creating a more radfem and matristic society in general. We need role-models in media to inspire us and make us believe that there could be another way of doing things. Plus I admit, as much as I try to be independent-minded, seeing asexual characters being happy and badass, and devoted sibling relationships and the perhaps even rarer nonviolent mother-child relationship, feels good to me in a way that’s almost like validation, like “See? This is actually a thing. It exists in the world.”

    It’s also a relief to just be able to occasionally think about that characters and relationships that I have an easier time identifying with. I think this is true of most asexual people: sometimes it wears to be different from almost everyone around us and be deluged with sexuality we don’t want to have to be involved in or think about. Sometimes in real life I just get a feeling like, “Why is this the world? Why does the world have to work like this? Could we just NOT, please?” I wouldn’t be surprised if this is why the favorite type of media of almost all the asexual people I know is video games, because most video games are about more interesting things than sex and romantic-sexual relationships, and you get a break from having to live in the sexual world.

    The censorship fiasco last November was dispiriting to me in a way I really wasn’t expecting, or even fully recognized for awhile. But I need to shake it off and pull myself together to start writing again, because obviously I don’t want a bitch move like what WordPress pulled to knock me out of the conversation. It means a lot to me that you’ve been reading some of my older writing and took the time to leave comments and bring me back into the loop. It makes me want to get back in gear and start writing again. Thank you very much for that.

    Liked by 2 people

    1. What a wonderful, extensive comment! Never hoped for one this goof when i posted,, (considering it’s a rough-shod, unfinished version)

      Men define sexual reality_like they define ALL reality. yes, even between Sapphics. No woman is free from patr. constraints. For instance, what’s stopping a lesbian from having a non-sexual life partnership with a lady, and then having casual sex with others when she feels like it?OR choose the asexual Or sex-critical route?

      Pairing up is not native to social species of our kind – only bird females pursue that kind of life-long bonding.

      Sexual behaviour (as we know it) is highly taxing to sensitive\introverted\disabled women. the body image| scaping; inevitable awkwardness’; the games around it; self-esteem built on it.

      Taking men out of it it takes out the Egyptian pyramid of hetero-fuckery {great term!} away, but the residue is sticky cos their presence still hovers over everything.

      Liked by 2 people

  11. I wonder how much of incomplete climaxing is down to my mind being asexual. No matter what my body likes>>> my brain goes “Ick’ slimy; NO, don’t wanna , don’t make me’. That’s why Prozac made me feel complete: my Mind +Body aligned – for once.

    Also , ur article made me realise the addictive nature of my activity. I skipped over the “Get screwed by 1000 dicks! So modern!!” brainwash; but I still got bogged down in the “Do it urself, ladies, cos men aren’t gonna do it for u! Yay, liberating!”.

    Recently I tested letting an urge pass by (ignoring It ) , and guess what….?

    I DID NOT EXPLODE. …In fact, NOTHING BAD HAPPENED TO ME..! I also saved time by not feeding the urge & extending its’ life


    Liked by 2 people

    1. I have both strong intense climax response to external stimulation and despise any penetration since childhood. Both of these are so strong that, for a long time, my autistic mind could not conceive of: 1. how any female could ever want to engage genitally with another person if they weren’t getting even better orgasms than they could give themselves, and I found that unlikely and 2. Why any female submitted to any kind of penetration, including medical exams, as I’d sooner shoot myself than let anyone do that to me.

      From reading this blog, CRE/Femonade, witchwind and trust your perceptions and then thinking further, I’ve come to the conclusion that there is vast differences among female bodies in terms of external and internal clitoral structure, but for the most part most females in the absence of het (and “sex pozzie” lesbian) programming, very very few females would see anything “sexay” about using dicks or objects to separate the vaginal walls.

      I’ve long been bothered about ‘vagina’ used as a counterpart to penis/term for all aspects of genitalia, but an added indignity is that what is called “vagina” is negative space that does not exist unless a dick, baby, or object separates the two usually-touching vaginal walls. So not only do they name the sum of female genitals by what makes their dicks happy, but they name a space that would not exist in the absence of their dicks (and later, a fetus) violently pushing the walls of the birth canal apart. In reality, women don’t have “vaginas” (ie holes) at all, it is in the absence of parasitic dick or parasitic fetus a CLOSED SPACE, but that’s how we are trained (by malesociety) to see the entirety of our genitals.

      Like you, kaguya, I was a childhood masturbator (object humper, really) to deal with autistic overstimulation and try to avoid frustration-triggered meltdowns. Back then and to this day I regard it as a necessary but unpleasant bodily function that crops up, I’d love it if I didn’t have the need, and I have NO IDEA what it has to do with love or even finding someone aesthetically appealing. The fact that the gun between the sadistic male’s legs is primed to torture women to release that urge while women have no corresponding Insta-orgasm torture device, is why society had to really push the idea of “there’s no romance without penetratory pronging” on women in all media: if women refused to believe that lie, they’d see fucking for what it really is and the peen would either not get their sadistic jollies or else go on a rape spree and reveal the truth to even the most “but it’s how he shows he loooooves me!!” cognitive dissonant of women. By pushing motherhood and baaayyybeeeez as a solution to women’s lack of being ( non-sexually) touched and loved, malesociety then traps the married women who see through the lie of sex, albeit too late, and are tempted to flee hubby prior to being impregged.

      Meanwhile, lesbian land has now been so thoroughly corrupted by malesexxay strapons’n’Beedeeessem, you will be branded a ‘political lesbian’ (even if, like me, you’ve never been attracted to men and had my first crush on a girl at age 6) if you’re not willing to engage in violent penetratory sex acts, let alone refuse to make your dating priorities something other than “she’s hot” and lots of sexxxaysexx, let alone (as Yinzadi mentioned) having a romantic and sensual-touching monogamous lifelong partnership with another female who is similarly attracted to females and repulsed by males.

      Like you, Yinzadi, I am appalled at the current ‘acceptance’ of asexuals “being ok with having sex for partner’s sake”. Of course, the asexual in these circumstances is always female and the ‘partner’ is always a peen who wants to ram it inside the asexual. In my worldview, this is rape. But thanks to libfem slutwalking idiocy, “consent” is all that’s needed for the dick to prong away guilt-free, even if the female hates every painful degrading minute of it.

      And, of course, doing the same thing and expecting different results is the definition of insanity, except when it comes to “it gets better the more you do it” sexxay sexx. Bullshit, it’s the same thing.

      And when is the one time you should keep touching that hot stove even if you get burnt the first few times? Yep! Sexxay sexx! Why don’t you just SAY YOU LIKE IT, dammit!

      Imagine a world where only a statistically insignificant amount of males have an actual orgasm during “sex” (even if they pretend to, or talk themselves into believing that whatever they were feeling, even if it was pain, is an orgasm). Even in the absence of all the risks females take on during sex, would males not only continue having it, but also walk scantily clad through the streets celebrating sexxxy as one of the cornerstones of their human rights? Would they shame other males for daring to say that sexxay sex not only isn’t all its cracked up to be, but also should not be automatically attached to them as a condition of existence? Hell no.

      SEX is the root cause of female enslavement.

      Liked by 1 person

      1. My only problem with Sapphic sexuality — is that it divided us & has been co-opted to serve dudely interests.

        I suspect that my ‘incomplete coming’ is due to low oxytocin. – i’m gonna ask the gyno I’m seeing for Endo metriosis for a boost. Cos the closest i get -is during ovulating – when oxytocin spikes

        my sexual interest is so weird + fuzzy. It’s more towards the middle of the scale
        , where i enjoyed beautiful folk in aesthetic sense& ‘d maybe want some partnering – if dude-society didn’t make it so impossibly socially stressful & my hyper-senstivity didnt make it so icky

        what disturbs me about penetration ~ if u do it urself gently &shallowly~it feels fine @ the time}but made me sore for hours after. and i got no pleasure out of it_only urge to do it. This is cos: ur brain can block the pain signal out.- this is why i purport that it’s all rape-adaptive :once the male is appeased by ur acquiescence &gets to stick it in}mission accomplished in u staying alive & not beaten to a pulp.

        Liked by 1 person

      2. And by partnering – i meant * the whole sorry business* of humping+ activity….Actual social unions based on it , -make no sense whatsover.

        Like u }i’d rather expereince no push towards it. I’d rather spend time , energy, mental space on the many sensual pursuits males’ve denied us. Like CRE said:
        we’re sensual beings in multiple ways. We HAD to be}to forage, bond, keep kids alive, link with nature. When I eat >> i wanna smell the food too. When a girl has colour-dyed dreads – i wanna reach out & tug them [not to cause her pain , but experience whatever’s unusual enough to capture my interest}

        When i was going off libido-numbing Lovan- i dreaded it hitting me again. If u do nothing to attend to it—sexual energy somehow yet manages to stress u out & eat up life force.
        It’s such a freaking waste

        Liked by 1 person

      3. Fascinating stuff on clitoral structure. So u’re saying that *wherever the demarcation ends for a certain woman*~that’s where the pleasure ends, correct? For me it seems to be on the entrance&no further. Rhythm is an important feature.


  12. Try watching Bojack Horseman for asexuality. It’s a delicious show in that “wallowing in misery thoughtfully + pleasurably ” sort of sense. In fact, it does it better than any anti-hero show.

    Liked by 2 people

  13. I mostly agree with all this stuff you said and linked to. Sexuality really is a destructive force in this world that imposes so much misery, with men going around doing crazy shit to fulfill these strange additive desires they get and women getting trapped in addiction to sexual desires because we are denied so much of what would really fulfill us that we grasp at any pleasure we can get. And I also don’t think female sexuality is anything like male sexuality either and our motivations for everything are different. Before I started reading radfem writings I had never heard anyone criticize sexuality or intercourse, it’s only the most obviously wrong forms of sex that are ever examined at all. It’s really been mind blowing to find that all this stuff is out there that people are thinking so many different things and all we hear is this one viewpoint, which is obviously the one that male dominated society wants us to hear.

    I just don’t think the comparison to sexuality to alcohol and gambling really fits. Those are things that are outside ourselves and not quite the same. The only thing that could really be compared with sex is food, especially with sugar. There are probably even more people that have food addictions then sex addictions that are eating huge amounts of unhealthy food and doing anything to fulfill that addiction. People are getting fatter and sicker to an extreme degree. Food is a need that has to be fulfilled, whereas you could still live without sex, but it comes from the same place of an internal biological drive. Your body isn’t saying to give it alcohol or whatever without those things already being introduced. The way food is produced is full of horrors just like how sex exists in its current state- factory farming, pesticides, unnatural ingredients… It seems like to say you should never have any kind of sex at all no matter what, you should say you should never have cake or anything either because that could be just as addicting.

    It all makes me think about the women who would get “hysteria” back in the day because they were so disconnected from their bodies and the doctors would masturbate them to “cure” them. Being denied connection with their bodies so much made them crazy. I wonder if the only reason it’s such a destructive force is because it’s entirely male defined and if we were able to define it ourselves it would be something unrecognizable to what it is now, where there is no need to get addicted to anything because we are not being deprived of anything. I think in a truly fulfilled life you could just eat a piece of cake and have some sex or masturbate and then move on and do other enjoyable things of other kinds, nothing would be overpowering and consuming and it wouldn’t take away from other parts of life. Like this whole addictive cycle for anything is just a result of the deprivation that wouldn’t exist without it.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. Just to speak about the hysteria thing: I think it’s a significant stretch to say that the Victorian iteration of hysteria can be attributed to Victorian women being more chaste than now. Hysteria is the quintessential patriarchal “disease” and has been used for thousands of years by men to dismiss women’s emotions and intellect, “explain” away diseases of all kinds without actually doing anything to treat the women who were ill, and justify forced marriage and sex. I don’t think it would be a controversial statement to say that it’s a catch-all “women be crazy” invented disease for whatever men find inconvenient or inferior about women. In Victorian times hysteria was also widely attributed to women masturbating, and to married women having too much sex (e.g., Dr. Kellogg and all the medical authorities influenced by him). Women who ran away from their husbands were also said to be hysterical and were often “treated” by clitoridectomy. So not only do I not think the existence of hysteria as a concept can be even remotely reduced to women being chaste and therefore “crazy,” I would venture that most women called hysterical were actually not “crazy” in any way whatsoever, but were simply sane women living in a world where they were men’s slaves.


      1. I wasn’t really thinking about all the aspects of it just the concept of being disconnected from the body and women’s experiences with the “treatment,” of course that’s right that they did just say women were crazy. Lol that’s what they always say. They definitely weren’t chaste in the sense that they weren’t having sex, but it was this disconnected unpleasant sex that was forced on them and probably never gave them pleasure. Then they were taught never to masturbate and had likely never experienced any kind of sexual pleasure and any real desires they had were continually denied through their lives because everything sexual they actually experienced was unpleasant and forced. So when the doctors had vibrators that did give them some sexual pleasure for the first time after years of built up frustrations there were women who kept coming back to get more “treatment.” It must have been a relief for some of them to finally feel that their body can give them pleasure instead of just something to be used by someone else. So that’s just the part of it that came to mind, the aspect of finally feeling some kind of relief from the buildup in your body after being denied anything that feels enjoyable and being unable to fulfill any actual desires. And if people who feel sexual desire are forced to ignore it to an extreme degree, especially where they are forced into doing sexual activity that isn’t pleasurable, I think it does create this unpleasant buildup that has bad effects on well being.


      2. Mid 20s is ur optimum reprod. age: old enough for a developed body, but young enough to have min. probs.

        I heard a story of a lesb., who all of a sudden got all into men & pIv @ that age – which really confounded her. Once she did reproduce > she was back with women & realised the meaning of that spell: it was simply her bio clock

        That could’ve been my 1 single pheromonal case- I was 26 then. It’s like my body measured the temperature of the atmosphere & assessed a suitable mating target. because i felt that chemical pull BEFORE i turned around & looked at the Y in question.


  14. See, mating urges ‘re contrary to the personal interest of mammal females:
    reproduction is so stupefying costly to us & males take no part in its’ cost. Plus they’re strong enough to force themselves (and do with alarming regularity), why the HEll must we be pushed hormonally? And why do not all women feel them, & some only weakly?

    This is why ^ I purport = it’s a wide scale rape adaptation; & like all evolution – it’s half-assed & varies across individuals. And it’s been going so long that the genetic memory’s moulded itself into our desires seamlessly. Think of the “roughing up”, rape fantasies, hair=pulling.

    Sexual revolution was only ever pulled off because of the completely ahistoric phenomenon of us being menstrual regularly for large sections of our lives – for the 1st time in forever. THere’re millions|billions of female ppl around the world today – who never arrived @ that stage. Some’re impregnated before menarche>> so they NEVEr experience those horny hormones.

    Remember that lactation used to be a several year -long thing until agriculture: and it kills ur drive like nothing else/

    Liked by 1 person

    1. Hmm so you’re saying basically our sexual urges have just come about to make the inevitable raping less traumatic and destructive to us? Like it could be compared to bugs where the males do traumatic insemination where they impale the female and since the females can’t just stop them from doing that they have developed adaptations to make it somewhat less traumatic.

      Liked by 1 person

      1. Exactly^

        Note how bonobo females ended up running the society thanks to being hyper-sexual + hidden estrus + having regular genital contact with each other..
        I suspect that we inherited our multi-orgasmic capacity from a similar ancestor. I need to find the link I read this, but we’re genetically closest to bonobo females; but our males > to chimp males! Which makes perfect sense; granted their ape behaviour

        Whereas chimp fem.s ‘re beaten up on a daily basis = cos they don’t go along without violence.where as we became so adapted that it’s possible to come from a Rape\rape, where the victim’ll feel confounded , cos she didnt’ enjoy it mentally!

        ^ this may explain my mental reaction to my drive. I interpret it all as unpleasant in my head – cos I’m just not adapted enough thx to my rigid brain.

        Females have incredibly adaptable, plastic brains. This is how normie XXs put up with their ever more hellish reality- like boiling frogs. But the sheer amount of rigid girls born now is astounding. Official figure for ASD = 1 in 68. But once u factor in the unrecognised girls , it may be as high as 1 in 40 + those with mild traits. And 1 in 5 kids has HSP : which is the sensory effects of autism, without social problem

        Liked by 1 person

      2. So it’s like us said:
        when the adaptation doesn’t work & only contributes to a terrible world >isn’t it time to end it? It seems like Mother Nature is doing it for us.
        Clearly u too possess some abnormal qualities to make u see the light.


      3. U know how CRE theorised that perhaps, the only purpose of Aspie male – is to produce world-saving aspie daughters?
        My autistic-seeming father had another girl ( i never had any contact with ). I’ve had the whopping thought of looking her up some day & seeing whether she got the gene too


    2. That makes a lot of sense, but I hope its not right! Things just get more horrible the more you learn and understand. That would be super depressing if even our own sexual feelings are just harm reduction. I don’t see sexuality as bad in itself, just horribly misused. Like food is a natural pleasure that is turned into something horrible when people eat a bunch of crap and get sick and society gets structured around encouraging people to eat badly.

      If we could just magically get rid of sexually and stop all the raping and molesting and all the other crap I would gladly get rid of it. Since we can’t do that though I don’t see any reason for people who aren’t doing anything bad with it to all force themselves to be asexual and feel bad about their sexuality.

      Liked by 1 person

    3. So thinking about the hyper sexual bonobos and the chimps being forced to go along with it and all that makes me think about how women have been trying to keep male sexuality from being out of control for like forever it seems, then the “sexual revolution” happened and a lot of women started trying all kinds of sexual things and joined in with a lot of the perverted things men do. From something I read somewhere this woman was saying how women had tried to keep men from being perverted and then they eventually gave up and tried to join in the perversion. So it’s like they realized men were never going to be able to stop doing harmful things and they figured it might be less harmful if they joined in and then they would have more sway to keep the men under control by giving them the sexual access that were going to forcibly get anyway.

      Liked by 1 person

      1. Yeah I must have something abnormal in my brain I guess. I feel constantly confused how people can go along with all this crap and not only that but think everything is going well. Even the most obvious things are so horrible and everyone knows about it, but just ignores it. I think the poisoning is by far the worst thing about this world and it’s not any kind of secret anymore, everyone knows our whole world is full of poison and these big companies are massively polluting more and more. It seems like pretty much everyone is sick now and the kids are even sicker with conditions that were previously unheard of (like food allergies), but people don’t seem to add everything up or they just don’t care that everyone is sick.

        I wish I could just ignore it too, honestly being aware of the horrors everything is built on is awful. I don’t know how to be happy anymore. Even if I am able to regain my health and do things I want in life, I feel really hateful now after everything I’ve experienced in life and everything I’ve seen others go through. I don’t know how to even function. I’m sort of jealous in a way of most people who just don’t care or notice anything that much. It’s so painful to be aware of any of it.

        I’ve been thinking how all of these horrible things people get nowadays can actually be a lot worse then all the horrible sicknesses people used to get, because if you got the plague or bit by a rattlesnake or mauled by a bear or whatever.. most of these things people used to get they would just kill you if they were bad enough, but most of the things people get now can be extremely painful and destroy people’s lives but they don’t kill you and leave people suffering and helpless. And before modern times people had a lot more family connections so family would take care of you, but now most people don’t have family connections or societal help to fill in.

        Liked by 1 person

      2. Very much so : on the diseases becoming chronic. ANti-biotics’ve forced bacteria to get nastier & hardier

        I have Babesiosis – a recently emerged; persistent, life-long cousin of malaria. It’s so awful that dying fast from malaria’d be my preference


      3. Damn good thought about bonobos ~ sex posie. I’ve noticed that I’m extra sexual…when i’m extra anxious. Bonobos have group orgies when they come upon a large source of food> get socially nervous. So they do it to relieve tension – before they tuck in – to prevent fighting.

        In fact – they get sexy out of nerves a solid proportion of the time. And what makes women more nervous than men??! Hetero contact is ALWAYS tied to fear.

        I can just imagine our world leaders going away into the back room to let loose as tensions arise :-D) World peace it would be..!.;

        Liked by 1 person

  15. Well, ALL the males’re doing harm just by carrying their deadly manipulating fluids around: so they must def. be out of the picture. Our fluids’ve never killed anyone.

    I can’t even imagine what it’d be like: knowing that ur genitals can kill & maim untold nos of humans,mostly female (& make them Wish they were dead). i’d be terrified of any stimulation

    Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s